Many say Elon Musk 'wants to be the US President' – but there's reason he can't
Elon Musk has declared that his new America Party has been "formed", seemingly taking a swipe at his one-time ally, now adversary, Donald Trump. The tech mogul floated the idea of creating a new political force on X on America's Independence Day (July 4), asking followers if he should establish a party to rival Democrats and Republicans, despite having financially supported the GOP in the previous election with a hefty sum.
The poll results showed a significant 65.4% of the 1.2 million respondents backing the formation of a new America Party, although the actual number of American citizens among them remains uncertain. The next day on July 5, Elon Musk, 54, took to X to proclaim: "By a factor of 2 to 1, you want a new political party and you shall have it!"
He lambasted the current political system, saying: "When it comes to bankrupting our country with waste and graft, we live in a one-party system, not a democracy. Today, the America Party is formed to give you back your freedom."
Speculation has since erupted on X over whether Musk harbours presidential ambitions.
One user emphatically posted: "ELON MUSK HAS OFFICIALLY ANNOUNCED THE FORMATION OF 'AMERICA PARTY.' Its Time for President Elon."
Another queried the X community: "If Elon Musk ran for president, would you vote for him?"
A third sceptically remarked: "Elon Musk really thinks he can be president."
Yet, there's a significant hurdle in his path.
Why can't Elon Musk be US President?
Elon Musk, the tech mogul behind Tesla and SpaceX, is barred from running for US President due to constitutional restrictions. Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the US Constitution stipulates that only a natural-born citizen can hold the presidential office, which excludes South African-born Musk despite his US citizenship.
What does Trump think about the issue?
Donald Trump has weighed in on the topic, dismissing any possibility of Musk taking over the presidency. Speaking in Phoenix, Arizona, in 2024, Trump addressed rumours about Musk's growing political clout.
"President Trump has ceded the presidency to Elon Musk? No, no, that's not happening," Trump declared. "But no, he's not going to be president, that I can tell you. And I'm safe. You know why he can't be? He wasn't born in this country," he continued.
Musk himself has consistently dismissed the idea of pursuing a political career, citing both the constitutional barrier and his lack of interest in holding office.
"My grandfather was American, but I was born in Africa, so I cannot be president," Musk acknowledged last year.
"But I actually don't want to be president. I want to build rockets and cars.
"I believe we want to be a spacefaring civilisation, and that's where my focus will remain."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
2 hours ago
- The Independent
Trump says US will resume weapon shipments to Ukraine days after pause
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging. At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story. The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it. Your support makes all the difference.
JAMnews
2 hours ago
- JAMnews
"Armenia could lose control over unblocked transport routes,": Opinion from Yerevan
Armenia reacts to Trump's proposal In recent days, the issue of unblocking regional transportation routes has being actively discussed in Armenia. The Carnegie Endowment, citing diplomatic sources, reported that US President Donald Trump's administration proposed that Yerevan and Baku hand over control of these transport links to a private American company. However, the details of the proposal have not been disclosed. Azerbaijan continues to insist on an extraterritorial corridor for direct land access to its Nakhichevan exclave. Armenian authorities maintain that they are ready to unblock transport routes, but stress that this must happen based on the principles of sovereignty, national jurisdiction, reciprocity, and equality. Meanwhile, international media outlets have been reporting on a possible meeting between Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev in the United Arab Emirates. While no official confirmation has been given, some analysts, citing their sources, have even named possible dates in July. Middle East Eye reports that the UAE is seeking to host the talks 'as part of its efforts to improve relations between the two Caucasus nations.' The Armenian prime minister's spokesperson, Nazeli Baghdasaryan, neither confirmed nor denied the reports. Political analyst Tigran Grigoryan says that if such a meeting takes place, the main focus will be on the unblocking of regional communications. However, he fears that if control over the road is handed to a private American company, Armenia will in fact face the logic of a corridor. And this is considered a red line by all local political analysts. Here's what is known about the US proposal, statements from Armenia's foreign ministry, and expert commentary. 'The guarantor will be American business' According to the Carnegie Endowment publication, the road would be controlled by an American company. The implementation of the agreements reached would be 'guaranteed by American business and American interests.' Olesya Vartanyan, the author of the article, explained in an interview with Radio Azatutyun (Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty) that the proposal reflects the logic of the Trump administration: 'It implies that if there are initiatives or proposals, they should, among other things, involve American business and American capital. There is an example of this approach not far from us—in Ukraine. They have even signed an agreement regarding rare earth metals.' According to Vartanyan, the proposal was delivered to the parties by Joshua Huck, US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, who visited Yerevan and Baku in May. The proposal is still under discussion, and there are 'various options' for how it might proceed. During her conversation with a State Department representative, she was assured that the program would be successful, and that 'President Trump might even receive a Nobel Prize for it.' What exact powers the American company would have, what specific functions it would perform, and whether it would manage the route only on Armenian territory or also on the Azerbaijani side—these questions remain unanswered. Yerevan proposes 'mutually beneficial outcomes for the region' In response to the Carnegie Endowment publication, Armenian foreign ministry spokesperson Ani Badalyan emphasized that Armenia has been and remains interested in unblocking regional transport infrastructure. She recalled the Armenian government's 'Crossroads of Peace' initiative, which has already received positive feedback from many international partners. 'Moreover, Armenia has proposed a number of solutions under this initiative that could be acceptable to all parties involved,' she noted, without disclosing details. Response to Erdogan's statement on Armenia's 'flexible approach' 'Although Armenia initially opposed the Zangezur corridor, it is now demonstrating a more flexible approach toward economic integration,' said Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, without providing details. According to Anadolu Agency, Erdogan suggested that the so-called 'Zangezur corridor' would bring new opportunities not only for Azerbaijan, but for the entire region. Commenting on his remarks, Armenian foreign ministry spokesperson Ani Badalyan stressed that Armenia has always been and remains committed to enhancing regional connectivity: 'With this understanding, Armenia presented the 'Crossroads of Peace initiative', along with concrete ideas, solutions, and constructive proposals. In our view, these can deliver mutually beneficial outcomes for regional countries as well as for partners interested in broader transport networks.' However, her main message was that Armenia's stance remains unchanged: 'As before, Armenia's vision for unblocking regional transport infrastructure is firmly based on the principles of sovereignty and national jurisdiction over communications, and does not envision any alternative logic.' Pashinyan counts on Trump Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan extended his congratulations to the US president on Independence Day, emphasizing his appreciation for Trump's efforts to end conflicts and promote global peace: 'I am confident that under your leadership, the United States will make a significant contribution to achieving long-awaited peace, stability, and prosperity in the South Caucasus.' Pashinyan also reaffirmed his government's commitment to a 'peace agenda based on the principles of sovereignty, territorial integrity, and the inviolability of internationally recognized borders.' Commentary Political analyst Tigran Grigoryan says that the issue of unblocking regional transport routes has been a priority for Washington, including under the Biden administration: 'Since summer 2024, there has been public information that a proposal is being discussed to oversee transit along this route through a private company acting as a facilitator.' According to him, earlier discussions involved a Swiss company, but Baku rejected that option: 'At this stage, the talks are centered on an American or Armenian-American joint venture overseeing the route. Armenia's participation in the project appears to be an Armenian proposal, primarily aimed at preventing a negative reaction from Iran.' Grigoryan stresses the importance of clarifying the details. He warns that despite all sides formally recognizing Armenia's sovereignty, the country could lose actual control over the route: 'We still have little information. But if Armenia delegates certain powers to this company, it could essentially introduce a 'corridor logic.' Even Pashinyan himself hinted at this during his meeting with the Armenian community in Turkey.' At that meeting, Pashinyan declared that there would be no 'Zangezur Corridor' and that Armenia's 'Crossroads of Peace' project would become a reality. However, he warned fellow Armenians: 'The moment the 'Crossroads of Peace' project is activated, Azerbaijan will say, 'Look, the Zangezur Corridor has been opened.' And we must be prepared for that. But any simplifications [of transit] must be within the framework of our sovereignty on our territory, and theirs on theirs. Such simplifications should be reciprocal.' Grigoryan doubts Iran will tolerate the presence of a US company on the route, and he expects Russia to object as well: 'After its withdrawal from Nagorno-Karabakh, Russia sees the unblocking of regional routes as its last remaining tool to maintain influence over Armenia and Azerbaijan.' He believes Baku has not yet accepted the US proposal. If the Armenian and Azerbaijani leaders meet in the UAE, the focus will likely be on unblocking the routes. As for a peace deal, Grigoryan remains skeptical: 'I see no signs that Baku will abandon its preconditions for signing an agreement—such as its demand for constitutional amendments in Armenia. There's little reason to expect any breakthroughs or compromises on this issue.' Journalist Tatul Hakobyan believes it doesn't really matter whether the unblocked roads are called a corridor, a highway, or a passage: 'The main issue is who will control the railroad and highway to be built from Azerbaijan to Nakhchivan and Turkey along the Araks River, through Meghri, on the sovereign territory of the Republic of Armenia.' He stresses that Armenia has repeatedly publicly stated that losing control over its territory is unacceptable. However, he adds that Armenia has now given preliminary consent to transfer about 45 kilometers of its roads and other infrastructure along the Araks River to the management of an American—or more precisely, an Armenian-American—organization: 'The Washington proposal to hand over management of the Meghri communications to an Armenian-American organization is effectively handing control to the American side. The 'Armenian' part [in the term Armenian-American] was inserted in the proposal in hopes of softening the anger of the Russian side and the currently weakened Iranian side.' According to Tatul Hakobyan, Yerevan is fundamentally not opposed to Washington's proposal, while Baku has yet to make a final decision. Because of this, he also places great importance on the bilateral Pashinyan-Aliyev meeting in the UAE. Follow us – Twitter | Facebook | Instagram Armenia reacts to Trump's proposal
South Wales Argus
3 hours ago
- South Wales Argus
Ruth Jones MP renews calls to ban UK trophy hunting imports
Ruth Jones, MP for Newport West and Islwyn, hosted a parliamentary event on July 3 organised by animal welfare groups FOUR PAWS UK, Born Free, and Humane World for Animals UK, marking 10 years since the lion's death reignited global debate over trophy hunting. Ms Jones said: "I was proud to stand on a manifesto which committed to ban the import of hunting trophies last year and deliver the biggest boost to animal welfare in a generation. "I hope that we can be the Parliament to finally deliver this legislation and can protect more animals from having to suffer the same fate as Cecil." Cecil was killed in Zimbabwe in July 2015 by American dentist Walter Palmer, who shot the animal with a bow and arrow. The lion died after 10 hours of suffering. Dame Joanna Lumley, patron of the Born Free Foundation, also spoke at the event. She said: "The brutal, senseless killing of Cecil a decade ago shocked and enraged me as it shocked and enraged the world. "Cecil's death cannot be in vain."
