logo
Ross Perot Transformed Politics. It Will Be Harder for Elon Musk.

Ross Perot Transformed Politics. It Will Be Harder for Elon Musk.

Politico4 days ago
Imagine for a moment a tech tycoon whose business empire relies on a cozy relationship with the federal government. Once a major Republican donor, he has gotten fed up with the two-party system and launched his own third-party political operation. His big concern is massive budget deficits, and he pledges to clean up government fraud, waste and abuse and sweep away bureaucratic red tape — applying the know-how of a systems engineer to tame the federal behemoth.
He has adoring fans who see in him an almost superhuman capacity to save the country, though he also has many detractors who see an erratic, paranoid and authoritarian personality, a megalomaniac in waiting. Opponents suspect the billionaire of offering political donations for lucrative government contracts. He promotes wild conspiracy theories involving high government officials. He wants to replace Congress and possibly the Constitution itself with government by electronic plebiscite where the public will instantly weigh in on the issues. And he routinely proposes grandiose plans only to get frustrated with media scrutiny, lose interest and sulk away. Then, all of a sudden, he announces a dramatic return to political life.
I think you all know who I'm talking about: H. Ross Perot, the eccentric Texan founder of Electronic Data Systems and two-time presidential candidate. But you get the conceit: I could just as easily be talking about Elon Musk.
Musk might even see Perot as his intentional model. On a February episode of the Joe Rogan Experience, the podcast host admiringly brought up Perot's strong challenge to the Republican-Democrat 'uniparty' system in his 1992 presidential bid, and Musk replied, 'I think most of what he was saying was true.'
Perot never became president, but his nearly 19 percent of the popular vote in 1992 marked the most successful independent White House bid in modern times. He also reshaped American politics for years to come, forcing both parties to focus on the deficit and planting the seeds for the kind of populist revolt that would bring Newt Gingrich control of the House and ultimately lift Donald Trump to power.
But replicating Perot's successes in 2025 and beyond won't be easy for Musk. Not only are the men actually quite different, but so is the moment.
When Perot launched his campaign on 'Larry King Live' in 1992, the public was deeply disillusioned with both political parties. The perception was that Democrats and Republicans alike were corrupt and beholden to special interests. A financial debacle revealed a political and economic elite in cahoots, with little accountability afterwards. The country was in the throes of a recession, and throughout the previous decade, the standard of living for the middle class was stagnant or falling. The Cold War had ended abruptly, and the nation felt adrift. Perot spoke directly to these concerns, monopolizing cable and talk radio coverage during the election. He excited an electorate that felt alienated and angry.
While Perot was eccentric — and spoke to a part of the country that felt increasingly left behind — he was also Middle American, folksy and quite conventional. He deployed charming old idioms with a Texan twang. He was the ultimate square with a flattop: a churchgoer, a doting husband and father, who never swore in public. He wore a suit, always with a white shirt and conservative ties. He decorated his office with Norman Rockwells and sculptures of cowboys. After a stint in the Navy during the Korean War, he worked as a salesman for IBM, perhaps the most buttoned-up corporation in a buttoned-up age. He took its corporate ethos into his entrepreneurial ventures. His image was not one of 'chaos agent' or 'disruptor-in-chief' but of competence, thrift and conscientiousness. Although his business was high-tech for its time, he was a figure of nostalgia. He represented the eternal 1950s, offering a hokey but comforting Americana that people still yearned for. And he was highly sober, even threatening to turn the military on drug dealers.
Regardless of whether you believe the reports of Musk's recreational activities, a South African immigrant and regular Burning Man attendee doesn't exude wholesome Americana.
The voters who flocked to Perot also differ greatly from Musk's supporters. Perot's people had been the managerial middle of the Cold War: engineers, office administrators and plant supervisors. Now they were being pushed into precarity, their worlds eroded by outsourcing and mergers and the sudden reduction of the defense and aerospace industries. Although Perot pitched himself as an alternative to the mainstream parties, Perot's base was rooted in the civic cultures of the Sun Belt suburbs and upper-Midwestern small towns — places where Rotary Clubs still met and where people watched 60 Minutes religiously. He did activate young, downwardly mobile voters who felt left out of the system, but many of his most dedicated volunteers had long histories of civic engagement. His political language was populist and he thrived in new media, but he was still bound by the old rituals of bipartisan America, things like the pledge of allegiance, town halls and debates moderated by broadcast anchors. These were people who had made it in the old system but no longer believed it was working. Their politics was defined not by class position exactly, but by a sense of loss: of competence, seriousness and national unity. They had believed in the postwar order, and when it cracked, they reached for someone who promised to restore it.
Musk has a much more fragmented nation and political terrain to navigate, in large part thanks to the social media revolution that he has hijacked. He doesn't speak for a class so much as he performs for fragmented audiences: a lumpenbroletariat of downwardly mobile professionals, bitter Redditors, anime porn addicts, finance bros, crypto hustlers, divorced dads stuck in YouTube rabbit holes. His appeal cuts across the cultural wreckage of the white middle class — not through its shared values, but through shared disillusionment. They don't have a real memory of a lost Golden Age, just AI-generated kitsch images that make Perot's Rockwellian America look like high art. This is not a constituency so much as a fickle public that wants to be entertained and distracted. They do not have the attention span to become the dedicated volunteers that got Perot on the ballot in 50 states. They rise in enthusiasm only to quickly return to indolence. And he has a major competitor for their attention: Trump, who can channel the same anti-system energy, but is genuinely funny and spontaneous in a way that Musk simply isn't.
Musk's moment may have passed as well. Richard Hofstadter famously wrote, 'Third parties are like bees: Once they have stung, they die.' Musk may have already stung. He has plenty of money in the bank, but he's spent much of his political capital. He rode into D.C. triumphantly with Trump's inauguration and then sort of skulked away in ignominy after making a spectacle of himself. His bold plan to fix the federal government with DOGE was both disastrous and anticlimactic. If you trust the polls, the public seems fed up with him. And is the deficit really enough of a political issue today? In the 1990s, Perot was able to make the deficit and debt a symbol of the declining economic fortunes of the nation. It's unclear if Musk can do the same in an age of distraction. Heck, it's unclear if Musk will even stay focused on his own political projects if he experiences setbacks or frustrations.
Finally, what is Musk's lane? For his era, Perot ran as a social moderate, with liberal views on abortion and guns, but Musk has associated himself with the hard right on cultural and social issues. Perot was not a paragon of racial enlightenment — referring to an NAACP audience as 'you people' hurt his 1992 candidacy — but he also spoke of the military as a true meritocracy that had helped reduce racism. Musk would likely mock such talk as 'woke.' Perot also championed economic nationalism and played to worries over what foreign trade was doing to American manufacturing. Musk, with extensive business interests in China, has no such cares; and besides, that populist issue is fully monopolized by Trump.
There is one issue that Musk may be able to exploit, a new vulnerability for the Trump administration: the so-called Epstein Files. Musk has seized on it amid his feud with Trump, and it echoes Perot's own promotion of the 'living prisoner' myth, the idea that the U.S. had abandoned soldiers in Southeast Asia after the Vietnam War. His advocacy for the POW/MIA movement fueled new distrust in the federal government, and no matter how much information was released or how many committees investigated it, the issue would not go away. The Epstein saga certainly has an emotional resonance that could fracture Trump's base and leave the discontented looking around for an alternative. But how many single-issue Epstein voters will there be one year from now, let alone three?
Without the ability to run for president, Musk is arguably emulating the least successful part of Perot's political career: his attempt to start a third party.
The Reform Party collapsed in a decade, elected just one statewide official in the person of Jesse Ventura, and no members of Congress. At the end of its existence, it was riven with factions, lacked any clear ideological vision for the country and became a catch-all vehicle for cranks and malcontents. Of course, one of those was named Donald Trump, who ran for the Reform Party presidential nomination in 2000.
Perot's political endeavors fed on political cynicism, but also deepened it: The message of 'nothing works' resonated. In that sense, there may be some similarities between then and now. Musk's America Party may not succeed in doing much in the short term, but it's worth watching closely. While Perot seemed to fade away and become a piece of political trivia, his movement sowed the seeds of a new type of politics. As Musk's moment may be already passing, it's time to imagine what may come after.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Democratic socialist in Maryland legislature ready to ‘fight like hell,' says party moving in his direction
Democratic socialist in Maryland legislature ready to ‘fight like hell,' says party moving in his direction

Yahoo

time14 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Democratic socialist in Maryland legislature ready to ‘fight like hell,' says party moving in his direction

BALTIMORE — As self-described 'Democratic socialist' candidates are seeing greater success in races around the country, one Maryland lawmaker who embraces the label believes Democratic Party voters are shifting in his direction. Del. Gabe Acevero, a 34-year-old member of the Democratic Socialists of America, represents Montgomery County in the Maryland General Assembly. He was first elected in 2018 — long before Zohran Mamdani and Omar Fateh gained national attention for winning the Democratic mayoral primary in New York City and an endorsement from the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party in Minneapolis' mayoral race, respectively. As the electorate becomes younger and more progressive, Acevero said that establishment Democrats should 'be cognizant' of what that constituency wants if it plans to win elections. 'If you look at where our base, where our constituency and where America is trending, we have to focus on working-class issues — from housing to socioeconomic, gender, environmental, justice — and we can't just continue to provide lip service as a party,' he said. 'We have to fight like hell, not just for the policies, but for workers and the working class. And that's what I've been committed to in the legislature and will continue to do so.' Del. Matt Morgan, a Republican from St. Mary's County, said he knows Acevero well and considers him 'a nice guy.' He said it's 'undeniable' that the Democratic Party is shifting in Acevero's direction. And, in fact, 'it's already there,' Morgan said. He thinks the push into socialism is ultimately a losing proposition for Maryland voters. 'Socialism has a 100% failure rate. The more it's implemented in Maryland, the more people are going to leave,' Morgan said. Recent elections in New York and Minnesota are perhaps indications that the word 'socialism' does not carry the same negative connotation among voters today — especially among Generation Z and younger millennials born after the Cold War, according to Flavio Hickel, an associate professor of political science at Washington College. These voters, and others who increasingly identify as 'working class,' believe Democrats 'need to offer a more ambitious, aggressive, and left-leaning' policy vision, Hickel told The Baltimore Sun on Wednesday. 'I don't think mainstream Democrats would regard what [Acevero] said as probably all that offensive or problematic,' Hickel said. 'They just might differ in sort of, the tactics — how far, how quick and how aggressively do we pursue progressive change?' A staff member for the Maryland Democratic Party did not immediately respond to The Sun's request for comment on Acevero's claims that Democrats are moving in his direction. What a Democratic socialist wants in Maryland Acevero's campaign platform has often leaned progressive: police and criminal justice reform, a $15-per-hour minimum wage, single-payer Medicare For All, universal basic income, higher taxes for the wealthy, and support for kids aging out of the foster care system. 'I think, at the time, a lot of people were trying to, essentially, discourage Democratic voters in District 39 from voting for me, because [they thought], 'these are like radical socialist policies,'' said Acevero. 'In actuality, what they are are popular policies that working people in our state want to see enacted, and so we ran a — similar to Zohran [Mamdani] — a people-powered campaign.' Like Mamdani, Acevero has been vocal in his support of Palestinians in the Gaza war against Israel during his time in the state legislature. In 2025, he introduced the Not On Our Dime Act, which would have required the Maryland Secretary of State to remove nonprofit organizations from the state's Registry of Charitable Solicitation if they knowingly engage in unauthorized support of Israeli settlement activity. That bill was heard in the House Judiciary Committee, but not debated on the floor. Acevero also sponsored a joint resolution in 2024 that would have conveyed to Maryland's congressional delegation that the General Assembly supports a long-term ceasefire in Israel and Palestine. The joint resolution was heard in the Rules and Executive Nominations Committee, but did not advance further. 'I've been very unapologetic' Acevero told The Sun that Democrats 'weren't particularly fond of' him because, prior to his election in 2018, he was an activist with a penchant for holding politicians in both parties accountable. 'I wasn't the darling of the establishment, and I certainly wasn't embraced by the establishment Democrats in District 39,' he said. 'I unseated a two-term incumbent, and I ran on a working-class, progressive agenda that some folks tried to weaponize … using the whole 'Red Scare Socialism' scare tactic.' Acevero alleges establishment figures later hand-picked a candidate to beat him in the 2022 primary, calling his policies 'pie in the sky' or 'radical.' Still, he won. Though he's rounding out his second term, Acevero still isn't necessarily 'embraced' by other Democrats in the General Assembly. Often when he participates in floor debates, he is jeered and his comments — occasionally incendiary — are often called into question. In 2021, he offered amendments to a package of major police reform bills because he felt the settled policy didn't go far enough. Acevero voted against the Democratic redistricting plan later that year because he says he doesn't believe in gerrymandering. He's publicly critical of criminal justice bills that establish mandatory minimum sentences, of which he said: 'Time and again, civil rights organizations have pointed out … it ties judges' hands, but it also disproportionately impacts, you know, Black and Latino people.' 'I've been very unapologetic about the policies that I advocate for and who I am, because I think it's important,' he said, adding that efforts to 'delegitimize Democratic Socialists and their policies [have] never worked.' -----------------

Republicans in Congress head home to angry voters. So much for summer break.
Republicans in Congress head home to angry voters. So much for summer break.

USA Today

time15 minutes ago

  • USA Today

Republicans in Congress head home to angry voters. So much for summer break.

The Jeffrey Epstein case has grown into a full-blown problem for Republicans who were already failing Americans. And that feels like a lose-lose scenario as 2026 midterm elections loom. What are you doing during your summer vacation? U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson apparently plans to spend his six-week break trying to get his story straight about the Epstein files fiasco. That's a daunting challenge for the Republican from Louisiana, who has flip-flopped from calling for "transparency" on the issue to sending the House home early on July 22 to shut down Republican attempts to release those files. But that's life when you unconditionally surrender the Article I powers that the U.S. Constitution grants Congress as a coequal branch of government to a scandal-prone presidency held by Donald Trump. If Johnson's vacation were a scary summer movie, we'd have to call it 'I Know What You Did With the Epstein Files.' Things don't look much better for the Republicans who are in control of the U.S. Senate. Trump wants that chamber to work through the summer break so it can rubber-stamp his nominees for various positions. If this also were a horror film, it would be a sequel – "No Way Out, Again" – because Trump did the same thing with a compliant Senate during his first term in 2018. So here are the options for congressional Republicans from now until early September: Go home and endure town halls with constituents angry about Trump's broken promise to release the Epstein files and the looming negative impacts of his signature budget bill. Or stay in Washington and answer a growing rush of questions as the Epstein news keeps beating like a "Tell-Tale Heart." Scary stuff, indeed. Epstein files put a stop to Republicans' victory lap Johnson has served less as a speaker of the House and more like a servant to Trump's expectations. And that was working for him. He helped pass Trump's budget bill, which slashes health care for the working poor while offering short-term tax relief for some in return for permanent tax cuts for America's wealthiest people. He did that as well with Trump's "rescission" package, which canceled federal funding that Johnson's own House had previously approved. He and Trump were looking forward to a victory lap on all that, despite consistent polling that shows a majority of American voters don't care for it at all. But the scandal surrounding Jeffrey Epstein, who has been dead for six years, will not pass away. Trump exploited conspiracy theories on the reelection campaign trail about his old cruising buddy, a convicted pedophile who died in prison in 2019 during Trump's first term while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges. But then Trump, who promised while campaigning in 2024 to release the Department of Justice's files on Epstein, decided recently to keep them secret, enraging his own supporters and putting his Republican allies in Congress in a tight spot. Maybe it's just a coincidence that Attorney General Pam Bondi is reported to have briefed Trump in May that he is mentioned in those very files that his supporters want to see released. So Trump's in a tight spot, too. Johnson's slipshod response to the Epstein secrecy has been to advocate for transparency, which Trump doesn't want, and then revert to presidential servitude by trying to stamp out any attempts at transparency. This has provoked something we rarely see anymore – bipartisanship – as Republican and Democratic members of the House voted together to subpoena the Epstein files. This doesn't look like it will simmer down in six weeks. Americans are clearly unhappy with Trump's Republican regime Republicans are hitting the road with a story that isn't selling well. A July 23 Fox News poll found that 67% of American voters think Trump's administration has not been transparent about Epstein, including 60% of the Republicans surveyed and 56% of Trump's so-called MAGA supporters. And then there's this: Fox News found that 4 out of 5 people in the survey said they were following the Epstein case. We're closing in on the end of July – vacation season – and these people are tuned all the way in on this. Trump's budget bill was also underwater in the poll, with 58% disapproving and 39% in support. That makes for testy town halls, if the Republicans dare to hold them in the next six weeks. And that feels like a lose-lose scenario with the 2026 midterm elections looming ever larger. Face your angry constituents and be ready to go viral on social media, exactly the kind of things that would-be opponents mine for campaign commercials. Or duck and cover and get branded a coward, exactly the kind of thing that would-be opponents exploit for campaign commercials. No matter which way Republicans go, at home or in Washington, they should first ask themselves: Does Trump care about how any of this impacts me and my future in politics, or is he only interested in protecting himself? I think they already know the answer. Trump is – now, in the past, in the future, always – looking out only for himself. That prompts two more questions. Why is he working so hard to keep the Epstein files secret? And do you really want to be on the record helping him with that secrecy if the files are finally released? Follow USA TODAY columnist Chris Brennan on X, formerly known as Twitter: @ByChrisBrennan. Sign up for his weekly newsletter, Translating Politics, here.

Tesla misses Wall Street expectations on revenue, earnings per share in second quarter earnings
Tesla misses Wall Street expectations on revenue, earnings per share in second quarter earnings

Yahoo

time23 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Tesla misses Wall Street expectations on revenue, earnings per share in second quarter earnings

Tesla's second quarter earnings signaled the company continues to go through a difficult patch, with both revenue and adjusted earnings per share missing the average Wall Street estimates. Revenue was $22.5 billion, down approximately 12% year over year, the sharpest decline in at least a decade. Adjusted earnings per share was 40 cents, down from 52 cents a year ago. Analysts, on average, had forecast revenue between $22.62 billion and $22.64 billion and adjusted EPS of $0.41 to $0.42 per share, with Tesla below the midpoint on each. Tesla's double-digit percentage revenue decline was primarily attributed to the ongoing slump in vehicle deliveries. Improved energy storage deployments and new service offerings provided minor offsets, but could not outweigh the hit from lagging car sales and persistent price competition across the electric vehicle industry. Operating income also fell significantly, coming in at $923 million, which was below consensus estimates of $1.23 billion. Net income dropped year over year as margins continued to shrink, pressured by lower average selling prices, higher raw material costs, and global trade headwinds. Tesla had previously reported deliveries of more than 384,000 vehicles in the quarter—a drop of more than 13% from the previous year—with production holding steady at just over 410,000 vehicles. This marks the second quarter in a row of reduced year-over-year deliveries. Wall Street had entered the earnings week with tepid expectations, citing declining sales, compressed margins, and elevated spending on research and development as factors dampening short-term prospects. While Tesla's results were slightly weaker than forecast, shares saw only a modest uptick in after-hours trading, as investors focused on the company's long-term ambitions rather than current sales struggles. Robotaxi, AI, and a new affordable model Tesla's leadership used the earnings release to reaffirm its pivot toward next-generation technologies. CEO Elon Musk highlighted the launch of Tesla's first Robotaxi pilot service in Austin, along with vague remarks related to the ongoing development of a long-rumored 'more affordable' Tesla model. Musk signaled that, amid stiffer automotive competition, Tesla's strategy increasingly centers on breakthroughs in autonomy, artificial intelligence, and energy solutions as pillars for future growth. Multiple challenges continue to weigh on Tesla, including expiring U.S. electric vehicle tax credits in October 2025, ongoing trade disputes and tariffs affecting costs and global supply, and intensifying competition from established automakers and Chinese EV brands. More generally, the brand has growing reputational issues associated with Musk and his support of President Donald Trump, even after the two had a falling out that coincided with fierce criticism of each upon the other. During Musk's brief role helping the administration, his sometimes successful attempts at slashing government spending provoked ire from much of Tesla's traditional customer base, with environmentalist and left-leaning politics. Other investors said they wished the distraction would go away. For this story, Fortune used generative AI to help with an initial draft. An editor verified the accuracy of the information before publishing. This story was originally featured on

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store