Elon Musk and the America Party: A real shot at a 3rd party or a way to manage Trump?

Miami Herald

7 hours ago

Editor's note: Welcome to Double Take, a regular conversation from opinion writers Melinda Henneberger and David Mastio tackling news with differing perspectives.
DAVID: There are two ways to think about a national third party: as a vehicle to get people elected and as a way to change policy. If Elon Musk's plan for the America Party is to elect a president or even compete with Democrats and Republicans for control of the House or the Senate, I wish him luck.
One thing is for sure, he's found a great way to spend a lot of money — a lot more than the $300 million he blew on the presidential candidate he now disavows.
But if his idea is to turn a third party into policy regardless of electoral wins, then it is a smart move. Just look at Robert F. Kennedy Jr. ,who turned a ridiculous third party candidacy into his own mini-MAGA movement and control of America's health care apparatus as head of the Department of Health and Human Services, where he's reshaping federal health policy based on the fantasyland science of his Make America Healthy Again movement.
For a bigger win, look back to Ross Perot, who was obliterated in the 1992 election, but whose deficit control ideas were adopted by both the Democrats and the Republicans, resulting in the first balanced budgets in decades.
I can't read Musk's minds, but his tweets seem to indicate he wants to target a handful of Senate races and a bigger number of House races to build an independent caucus in Congress that will be the kingmaker at critical moments on legislation. That's folly for three reasons.
First, recruiting the kind of candidates who can break through and win is really tough, when Republicans and Democrats can offer ambitious people easier routes to power.
Second, to have influence in this way, he'd have to win actual elections. There's not much history of Libertarians or democratic socialists winning elections outside the two party system.
Third, Trump will still have the veto, and spendthrifts among Democrats and Republicans alike could choose to work together to keep up their reckless ways without bowing to the America Party's green eyeshade accountants pointing at the deficit.
MELINDA: Since we've discussed Mr. Musk before, you know that the kindest thing I can say is that I do not hold him, his dodgy DOGE or how he sees women, families, compassion or what we owe one another while we're here on this planet in very high regard.
However, since we desperately need real alternatives to both of our major parties, I think this America Party he wants to fund is an idea worth trying. Now, Musk may well change his mind again — or as you said, minds, which although it might have been a typo is perfect.
DAVID: Now I am going to have to be careful of my typos because if you mention them, then I can't correct them later.
MELINDA: We all make 'em. Though my kids delighted in calling me 'grammar freaky,' I also make that kind of mistake. Anyway, as I was saying, Musk's America Party would presumably mostly pull from Republicans. But it's too bad there's no center-left Musk willing to do this as well, for the good of the country, and please don't mention No Labels.
DAVID: No Labels has been amusingly hapless. It is like they are trying to create a third option without upsetting anyone in the Democratic or Republican parties.
I too wish, someone would shake up the Democratic Party, too.
MELINDA: They did not amuse me, but relieved a lot of well-intentioned people of their cash to pay #MeToo offender Mark Halperin a huge salary as a consultant, which did not signal values for any third, fourth or fifth way I wanted any part of. Yes, quaint me, but as The New York Times would say, this was emblematic of what they were selling, which was the same old thing, which can't ever be an exciting new thing.
Democrats are in trouble even with their own tribe; while only 4 in 10 Americans say they approve of the job Trump is doing, that's a stadium wave of enthusiasm compared to the 27% approval rating for congressional Democrats, mostly because Ds themselves have had it with their team's meek approach.
While 73% of Republicans are A-OK with Congressional Rs doing whatever Trump says that day, even if that changes so often that Trump himself doesn't always seem to know what that is, just 44% of Democrats are satisfied with the job their representatives are doing. With some exceptions, I agree with this harsh assessment, and do have one suggestion: Chuck Schumer, what if you just stopped talking?
Back to Musk, he is not trying to elect a president; he did that already, and did it make him happy? He walked away richer and more powerful but if anything, all the more furious.
He says his goal is to 'laser-focus on just two or three Senate seats and eight to 10 House districts.' If what he's really after is to elect a bunch of deficit hawks, I don't see that going anywhere with the public, especially once they see what a bite the Big Nasty Cuts will put on them, so among other things we could spend $45 billion on filling a bunch of Alligator Alcatraz prisons with non-criminals.
I know Musk will never soften that focus, but if he widened it, I see what he's setting out to do as difficult, but not impossible.
DAVID: If Musk had some political smarts, which he may or may not, he'd build his party not around stricter accounting— he'd build it around his brand, which is the future. Think Mars and artificial intelligence and electric cars.
Perot was on the right track, but he thought too small. Deficits and debt are a burden to the young — our future — but there is much more than that. Social Security and Medicare are giant subsidies for the past at the expense of the future. So are ag subsidies and steel tariffs and high-speed train dreams.
MELINDA: Oh, Mama. Social Security and Medicare are not subsidies for the past but benefits we've earned over the course of our working lives. And I think we agree that we're going to need to start over on public health once RFK Jr. is done.
DAVID: Spoken like you're FDR himself. Look at it another way: Why do we invest in the technologies from literally Before Christ (agriculture and steel) and 1804 when the train locomotive was invented? Most of the federal budget is invested in the past. Second most is spending on the present (defense and public health). As a percentage of the federal budget, very little is spent on the future (space and research and education).
A party focused on that could start some conversations that are badly needed and draw supporters from both political parties, as well as those who are so profoundly uninspired by our present politics, which seems to be more focused on handing out the booty from political victories than taking our country to any particular place.
MELINDA: FDR was derided by my family, so I know all of the 1930s jokes about him. As you probably know, there were serious concerns, valid ones, about his health as early as his second term, so maybe when Congress finishes booting Joe Biden and his loved ones around, they can look into that scandal, because what did Roosevelt's ailing, nonambulatory self ever accomplish, even on the brink of death? Oh, right.
In this century, in any case, we need several new parties, and if Musk wants to begin the splintering, which is definitely his best event, then he should by all means go right ahead.
Should he succeed, then his faction would wield a lot of power in an evenly divided country and Congress. And so, would be able to provide a real check on his former whatever he was, Donald Trump, someone Musk already thought he'd bought and paid for once. Yeah, I think that's the goal.