Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

America's political orphans have options in the presidential election

Sen. Joe Manchin

Sen. Joe Manchin could join an already crowded presidential ballot as the No Labels candidate.

Samuel Corum/Getty Images

Klug served in the House of Representatives from 1991 to 1999. He hosts the political podcast “ Lost in the Middle: America’s Political Orphans.”

Is this the year the first independent candidate can make a serious run for president since Ross Perot rattled Republicans and Democrats in the 1990s? Nearly 60 percent of Americans say they would consider a third-party candidate for president, according to a recent Harris Poll.

This year voters may have a complicated ballot with Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Cornel West and a possible No Labels ticket jockeying for position. Could Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) be part of the rumored No Labels bipartisan ticket, or make a run on his own?


“Voters may be surprised at how many choices they actually have,” Kyle Kondik, a political analyst at the University of Virginia, told NBC News. “It’s going to make polls even harder to figure out. It’s an added haze over the whole battlefield.”

There have been three serious independent candidacies in U.S. history. Each of them displayed a unique set of skills. Teddy Roosevelt brought unmatched charisma to the race. Little appreciated was the sophisticated organization of George Wallace, whose campaign was the first to figure out how to tap into direct mail as a fundraising tool. And Ross Perot had a tireless army of grassroots volunteers.

But in the end, they all fell short. One Hundred and ten years later, Roosevelt still holds the record for third-party candidate success, having won a mere six states. Wallace managed to capture five in 1968. Perot did not win a single state in either 1992 or 1996.

Frankly the major challenge for all of this year’s rumored candidates is navigating the onerous rules put in place by Republicans and Democrats to keep others off the ballot and freeze them out of the debates.

To get perspective, I interviewed Perot’s and Ralph Nader’s campaign managers for my podcast, “Lost in the Middle: America’s Political Orphans.” The United States, they argued, does not tolerate antitrust behavior in the economic system but, sadly, it does in the political world.

We explored the appeal of independent candidates as well as the gauntlet of real-world challenges. I also explained how a campaign rally for one of them cost me my date for the prom.

Read More

When Good Intentions Kill Cures: A Warning on AI Regulation

Kevin Frazier warns that one-size-fits-all AI laws risk stifling innovation. Learn the 7 “sins” policymakers must avoid to protect progress.

Getty Images, Aitor Diago

When Good Intentions Kill Cures: A Warning on AI Regulation

Imagine it is 2028. A start-up in St. Louis trains an AI model that can spot pancreatic cancer six months earlier than the best radiologists, buying patients precious time that medicine has never been able to give them. But the model never leaves the lab. Why? Because a well-intentioned, technology-neutral state statute drafted in 2025 forces every “automated decision system” to undergo a one-size-fits-all bias audit, to be repeated annually, and to be performed only by outside experts who—three years in—still do not exist in sufficient numbers. While regulators scramble, the company’s venture funding dries up, the founders decamp to Singapore, and thousands of Americans are deprived of an innovation that would have saved their lives.

That grim vignette is fictional—so far. But it is the predictable destination of the seven “deadly sins” that already haunt our AI policy debates. Reactive politicians are at risk of passing laws that fly in the face of what qualifies as good policy for emerging technologies.

Keep ReadingShow less
President Donald Trump standing next to a chart in the Oval Office.

U.S. President Donald Trump discusses economic data with Stephen Moore (L), Senior Visiting Fellow in Economics at The Heritage Foundation, in the Oval Office on August 07, 2025 in Washington, DC.

Getty Images, Win McNamee

Investor-in-Chief: Trump’s Business Deals, Loyalty Scorecards, and the Rise of Neo-Socialist Capitalism

For over 100 years, the Republican Party has stood for free-market capitalism and keeping the government’s heavy hand out of the economy. Government intervention in the economy, well, that’s what leaders did in the Soviet Union and communist China, not in the land of Uncle Sam.

And then Donald Trump seized the reins of the Republican Party. Trump has dispensed with numerous federal customs and rules, so it’s not too surprising that he is now turning his administration into the most business-interventionist government ever in American history. Contrary to Adam Smith’s “invisible hand” in the economy, suddenly, the signs of the White House’s “visible hand” are everywhere.

Keep ReadingShow less
Cuando El Idioma Se Convierte En Blanco, La Democracia Pierde Su Voz

Hands holding bars over "Se Habla Español" sign

AI generated

Cuando El Idioma Se Convierte En Blanco, La Democracia Pierde Su Voz

On Monday, the Supreme Court issued a 6–3 decision from its “shadow docket” that reversed a lower-court injunction and gave federal immigration agents in Los Angeles the green light to resume stops based on four deeply troubling criteria:

  • Apparent race or ethnicity
  • Speaking Spanish or accented English
  • Presence in a particular location
  • Type of work

The case, Noem v. Vasquez Perdomo, is still working its way through the courts. But the message from this emergency ruling is unmistakable: the constitutional protections that once shielded immigrant communities from racial profiling are now conditional—and increasingly fragile.

Keep ReadingShow less