Elon Musk faces daunting path in challenging US two-party system
David Jolly, a former Republican congressman from Florida who left the party over Trump, said Musk can provide what has long been required for such a push: money.
'What the independent space has been lacking has been resources,' Jolly said. 'It's more than filing with the Federal Election Commission. It's really [about] starting 50 state parties. You're talking about $100m (R1.78bn) just to enter the space with real serious intent.'
In 2016 former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg, another billionaire, made a similar conclusion, rejecting the idea of running for president as an independent, saying that such a candidate would have 'no chance of winning'.
Jolly estimated it would take Musk 10 years and perhaps $1bn (R17.7bn) to build a viable national party — and said Musk's recent history with his department of government efficiency (Doge) suggests the billionaire may not be in it for the long haul. Musk left Doge after just a few months in Trump's administration, having delivered little of the savings he promised.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mail & Guardian
3 days ago
- Mail & Guardian
The dangerous allure of Mkhwanazi's state collapse narrative
KwaZulu-Natal police commissioner Lieutenant-General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi. (@SAPoliceService/X) he essence of politics lies in the conquest of hearts and minds, achieved by whatever means prove necessary. While numerous strategies exist to accomplish this, one particularly intriguing tactic is the notion of political martyrdom. This is the deliberate projection of ethics, sacrifice and altruism, even at the expense of one's own self-preservation, to sway public sentiment so profoundly that it compels audiences to overlook even the most dubious subtexts beneath such displays. Let me preface this by stating unequivocally that I do not, in any way, accuse the KwaZulu-Natal police commissioner of employing such a strategy. It may well be that his seismic revelations of corruption were motivated solely by an unwavering devotion to this nation and its people. But, what must be plainly understood in politics is the old axiom: where there is smoke, there is fire. One cannot simply disregard the events that unfolded during Mkhwanazi's press conference, nor those that followed in its wake. Let us examine some of the signs that warrant scrutiny. The press conference, in retrospect, employed symbolic imagery reminiscent of a classic coup d'état. For reasons unknown to the public, Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi appeared in paramilitary attire, flanked by fellow officers similarly dressed, with some conspicuously masked in balaclavas. Beyond the seismic corruption revelations he delivered, the subtext of his message was unmistakable: the state, including both the executive and the judiciary, could not be trusted. While Chief Justice Mandisa Maya issued a forceful rebuke of Mkhwanazi's claims, the executive's leader, President Cyril Ramaphosa, adopted a weaker response — authorising a commission of inquiry and suspending the implicated police minister, Senzo Mchunu. Ramaphosa's reaction served to reinforce, at least in the public eye, Mkhwanazi's underlying narrative: that the state is inherently untrustworthy. Consequently, we have witnessed crowds mobilising in Johannesburg and Durban under the slogan 'Hands Off Mkhwanazi' (a classic hallmark of martyrdom politics) rallying behind the narrative of institutional distrust. This phenomenon is unprecedented in South Africa; even during the Zuma era, protests were directed at the man himself ('Zuma Must Fall'), not the state as an entity. What distinguishes Mkhwanazi's movement is its implicit assertion that the system itself is diseased and must be dismantled. That, to my mind, is the perilous blaze beneath the smoke, one we would do well to observe with vigilance. As committed democrats and South African patriots, we must subject Mkhwanazi's narrative to rigorous scrutiny. While none can deny the pervasiveness of corruption within certain state institutions, it would be intellectually dishonest to assert our entire state system has collapsed beneath its burden. Consider the judiciary, which steadfastly remains resilient. Civil society endures as a necessary watchdog, unearthing graft and malfeasance. The rule of law, though tested, persists, compelling even the most wayward politicians and business actors to tread cautiously, as though haunted by its spectre. Our democracy stands intact; the imperative is not demolition, but course-correction — reforming the state to perfect our system, not destroy it. We must guard vigilantly against justifying necessary reforms through narratives of total state collapse. In a nation already exhibiting troubling symptoms of mass discontent — with security vacuums, widespread disillusionment and entrenched deprivation — this rhetoric risks becoming the very kindling for violent insurrection. Is this truly our desired outcome? I submit this question for sober reflection. Siseko Maposa is the director of Surgetower Associates Management Consultancy. The views expressed are his own opinion.
The Herald
3 days ago
- The Herald
Trump's name on 2003 birthday letter to Epstein: reports
Donald Trump's name appeared on a risque 2003 personal note to Jeffrey Epstein, the Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday. The US president responded that the letter was fake. The Wall Street Journal reported the letter was one of several included in a leather-bound album meant to celebrate Epstein's 50th birthday, about three years before sex abuse allegations emerged against the financier. Reuters could not immediately confirm the authenticity of the letter. Trump quickly responded to the story on his Truth Social platform, saying he would sue the newspaper and Rupert Murdoch, who controls its publisher, News Corp. "The Wall Street Journal, and Rupert Murdoch, personally, were warned directly by President Donald Trump that the supposed letter they printed by president Trump to Epstein was a fake and, if they print it, they will be sued," Trump wrote. "President Trump will be suing The Wall Street Journal, NewsCorp, and Mr Murdoch shortly." A spokesperson for the Wall Street Journal and its parent company, Dow Jones & Co, declined to comment on its story or Trump's threat to sue. Representatives for News Corp and Murdoch could not immediately be reached for comment.
The Herald
3 days ago
- The Herald
Much at stake in how you cast your vote
And so it starts. In just over a year's time, South Africans will vote in the 2026 local government polls , the country's seventh such election since the dawn of democracy. This week, Nelson Mandela Bay got a taste of what's to come. In what was widely viewed as a litmus test ahead of next year's elections, residents in the Bay's Ward 34 went to the polls on Wednesday in a by-election after the death of DA councillor Johnny Arends in April. While six parties contested, including the National Alliance, ANC, EFF and PAC, the PA and DA were seen as the front-runners in what was expected to be a hotly contested election. In the end, it was just 188 votes that separated the two, with the DA securing 2,382 votes (46.56%) to beat the PA with its 2,194 votes (42.89%). In the 2021 local government elections, the DA won the ward with 63.14% of the votes, followed by the National Alliance (17.12%) and PA (2.78%). So what, you might ask? For those who do not fully understand the difference between the national and municipal elections , these are the elections that determine who will represent us at a grassroots level, possibly for the next five years if there are no by-elections in between. These are the ward councillors, in particular, who will take our concerns — literally from our streets — and place it on the municipal agenda. Our first port of call as citizens as far as service delivery is concerned, these are the councillors — we hope — who will ensure our concerns are addressed. As we edge closer to next year's elections, we expect the campaigning of the past three months in this ward will only intensify as parties vie for the support of voters — and spread to other wards across the Bay. And as they campaign, remember this: the outcome of these municipal elections have the most immediate and visible impact on our daily lives, from the overgrown grass in our parks, to the street lights lining our roads and so much else in between. Take the time over the next few months to understand what political parties offer and reflect on what they have already delivered — or not — as you decide who deserves your vote. But, whatever you do, just vote. The Herald
