Donald Trump says he's not worried about Elon Musk's third party
Musk, a former White House adviser who has turned into a top Trump foe, said the new party will "fight the Republican/Democrat Uniparty," arguing that "when it comes to bankrupting our country" both Democrats and Republicans are the same.
In the 2024 presidential election, Trump allies worked to boost third party candidates Jill Stein of the Green Party, Cornel West and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (before Kennedy bowed out to endorse Trump) to peel off votes from Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic nominee.
More: 'Train wreck': Trump slams Musk after billionaire announces new political party
It's unclear how far Musk is willing to go to mount a third party that can be viable in future elections.
Although he's the word's richest man, Musk would face a labyrinth of different qualifying rules to field candidates in all 50 states during the 2026 congressional midterm elections. And Musk - despised by many on the left and now seemingly a Trump foe - would need to recruit candidates to a party that lacks a clear agenda.
Other recent third parties in the United States, including the Libertarian Party and the Green Party, have not won any congressional seats. The last third-party presidential candidate to mount a serious threat for the White House was Ross Perot, who in 1992 won 19% of the popular votes but carried no states as an independent.
Reach Joey Garrison on X @joeygarrison.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
32 minutes ago
- The National
Force the 1% to cough up for their climate damage
Land ownership in Scotland is incredibly concentrated in a small number of hands. Fewer than 500 people own more than half of our private land. This motley group includes our own aristocrats, whose families have owned huge estates for centuries and whose wealth is often a result of their forebears' brutal actions during the Highland Clearances. But in recent decades they've been joined by a new group, the elite of global capitalism. The biggest landowner in Scotland used to be the Duke of Buccleuch, but now it's Danish billionaire Anders Povlsen. And the ruler of Dubai, Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum isn't far behind. READ MORE: More Scots need to benefit from Scotland's screen industry, John Swinney says And he might not be in the same league as Povlsen or the Sheikh in terms of hectares, but Scotland's most infamous landowner is undoubtedly Donald Trump. Thankfully, the US president has now returned home after a brief stint of shaking hands, being drowned out by bagpipes and teeing off at his Scottish golf courses. Last year, I proposed a private jet tax which would see Trump and his cronies charged a 'super rate' of up to £250,000 every time they fly here for non-government business. This is something which should be within the powers of the Scottish Government, but is now a decade overdue. In the aftermath of the independence referendum, all parties agreed to devolve air passenger duty to the Scottish Parliament. An Act was passed by MSPs to replace it with a new Scottish air departure tax. But it can't start until the UK Government resolves an issue with the exemption for lifeline island flights – and neither they nor the [[Scottish Government]] seem to be in any rush to do that. If this was resolved, the Scottish Government could immediately bring in a super-tax on private jets, reflecting the fact that they are about twenty times more polluting than regular flights. Personally, I'd rather ban most private air travel. It is the perfect example of how the world's richest 1% are disproportionately responsible for the climate crisis. Unfortunately, full powers over air travel are still reserved to Westminster for now. Trump doesn't care about the climate, but he would care about the £250,000 tax bill every time his huge private plane arrives here. Some super-rich elites would undoubtedly take the financial hit and still fly here anyway, but the money raised could at least then be used to fund climate-friendly policies like cheaper buses and trains. And private air travel is just one example of how the super-rich play by different rules to the rest of us, all whilst avoiding paying their fair share. For too long, they have been allowed to avoid not just paying their fair share in tax, but also having their often deeply damaging activities scrutinised. All while ordinary people suffer the consequences of budgets for schools, hospitals and social care being squeezed. Tax is the price we pay for living in a civilised society, one with public services capable of meeting all of our needs throughout our lives. But the richest among us do not pay nearly enough towards maintaining the services needed for that kind of society. The Scottish Greens have long called for a wealth tax, one which would see the richest 10% of people who hold almost half the total wealth of the country taxed fairly. Introducing just a 1% annual tax on all wealth and assets above £1 million would massively boost the efforts to create a fairer, better Scotland for everyone. For context, the other 90% of Scots households hold nowhere near enough wealth to be considered for such a tax, with the average having about £214,000 in assets. This would be an extremely well-targeted tax, raising billions from those who can more than afford to pay. We are not the only people calling for a wealth tax. Just this week, leading economists from across the world have called on Labour to introduce a UK-wide wealth tax to tackle extreme levels of inequality and poverty. They have warned the Government what the Greens have argued for years: that far too much wealth is concentrated in the hands of far too few people in the UK, and it is damaging society at large. Sadly, Labour seem determined to rule this out. It is time for Keir Starmer to seriously rethink his approach and what he wants his legacy to be: a society where everyone has what they need to get by, or one where far too many children are left in desperate poverty whilst a tiny number of people hoard more wealth than they could spend in a thousand lifetimes. The Scottish Greens are clear on what we need to do: tax the super-rich now, for the good of people and planet.
Daily Mirror
3 hours ago
- Daily Mirror
Donald Trump insists he's reached 'excellent' tariff deals - but won't give any details
Donald Trump has signed orders for new tariffs to go into effect in seven days on a wide range of US trading partners, including Mexico, Japan, Taiwan and Australia Donald Trump insists he has set "excellent" new tariffs on a range of trading partners - but didn't give any details on these. The US President today stressed his trade agenda will maintain the global economy and sturdiness of alliances his nation has built up over decades. The White House announced agreements with various nations and blocs ahead of the president's self-imposed Friday deadline. The tariffs are being implemented at a later date in order for the rates schedule to be harmonised. Speaking last night, Mr Trump said: "We have made a few deals today that are excellent deals for the country." However, the world leader did not go into any detail on these, such as the nations involved and his senior administration officials also declined to offer more information when asked by reporters. It comes after Mr Trump recently reignited his feud with Sadiq Khan in front of Keir Starmer, with a savage jibe at the London Mayor. The Mirror understands some tariffs have been lowered, and it is thought these include the original 50% threat to Lesotho. It is believed the African nation's goods will now be taxed at 15%. Our understanding is Taiwan will have tariffs set at 20%, and Pakistan at 19%. Israel, Iceland, Norway, Fiji, Ghana, Guyana and Ecuador are among the countries with imported goods taxed at 15%. Switzerland would be tariffed at 39%, it is thought. However, Mr Trump, the former businessman, would not be drawn on commenting on exact arrangements for specific nations. But he did confess: "We haven't spoken to Canada today," in a pertinent reference following a fresh jibe at Mark Carney's nation earlier this week. The US leader had said it would be "very hard" to make a trade deal with Canada after the country became the latest nation to recognise a Palestinian state. He had posted on social media: "Wow! Canada has just announced that it is backing statehood for Palestine. That will make it very hard for us to make a Trade Deal with them. Oh' Canada!!!" Yet, Mr Trump had announced a 50% tariff on goods from Brazil, but the order was only 10% as the other 40% were part of a separate measure approved by Mr Trump on Wednesday. One of his first significant moves as president was to impose tariffs on goods from both Mexico and Canada earlier this year. US Census Bureau figures show that the U.S. ran a $171.5 billion trade deficit with Mexico last year.
Reuters
3 hours ago
- Reuters
Rwanda, Congo hold first meeting of joint oversight committee under peace deal
July 31 (Reuters) - Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo held the first meeting of a joint oversight committee on Thursday, taking a step toward implementing a peace deal agreed last month in Washington even as other commitments are yet to be fulfilled. The African Union, Qatar and the United States joined the meeting of the committee in Washington, which was established as a forum to deal with implementation and dispute resolution of the peace agreement. The deal in June between Rwanda and Congo marked a breakthrough in talks held by U.S. President Donald Trump's administration, which aims to bring an end to fighting that has killed thousands and attracted billions of dollars of Western investment to a region rich in tantalum, gold, cobalt, copper, lithium and other minerals. In the Washington agreement, the two African countries pledged to implement a 2024 deal that would see Rwandan troops withdraw from eastern Congo within 90 days. It also said Congo and Rwanda would form a joint security coordination mechanism within 30 days and implement a plan agreed last year to monitor and verify the withdrawal of Rwandan soldiers within three months. Congolese military operations targeting the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR), a Congo-based armed group that includes remnants of Rwanda's former army and militias that carried out a 1994 genocide, are meant to conclude over the same timeframe. But 30 days from the signing has passed without a meeting of the joint security coordination mechanism, and operations targeting the FDLR and the withdrawal of Rwandan soldiers have yet to begin. The joint oversight committee meeting, due to meet within 45 days of the signing, was on schedule. Trump's senior Africa adviser, Massad Boulos, told reporters on Wednesday that the deal was not off track, adding that a meeting of the security mechanism was due to be announced in coming days. Asked about lack of progress on operations against the FDLR and withdrawal of Rwandan soldiers, Boulos said: "There was no timeline for that... if you look at the chronology of what we've been able to do since April, it's been extensive, and it's been very much on point and very much in line with our aspirations. So it's not off track in any way." But sources with knowledge of the negotiations recognised delays in the implementation of the deal, but added it was not yet threatening the deal as a whole. Military and diplomatic sources told Reuters that the parties in conflict, including armed groups as M23 and militia fighters known as Wazalendo, have strengthened their military presence on the front lines.
