Latest news with #ReformParty
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Elon Musk wants to start a 3rd party — the America Party — to take on Trump and the Democrats. Could it work?
In 1992, Ross Perot — a billionaire frustrated with America's ballooning budget deficits and fed up with its two-party system — ran for president as an independent. He won 19% of the vote against the Republican incumbent (George H. W. Bush) and his Democratic challenger (Bill Clinton). A few years later, Perot formed a third party — the Reform Party — and ran again in 1996 as its first White House nominee. Now Tesla CEO Elon Musk, another frustrated billionaire, seems to want to follow in Perot's footsteps and build an even bigger, better third party of his own. 'When it comes to bankrupting our country with waste & graft, we live in a one-party system, not a democracy,' the world's richest man wrote earlier this month on X, the social media platform he owns. 'Today, the America Party is formed to give you back your freedom.' Is Musk serious? And could his plan really work? It wasn't so long ago that Musk was calling himself Trump's 'first buddy.' After spending more than $250 million to help his friend win the 2024 election, Musk spent the first few months of Trump's second term waging a largely unchecked war against the federal bureaucracy as head of the newly formed Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). But then in early June the two tycoons had a major falling out over Trump's 'One Big, Beautiful Bill.' Trump claims Musk was 'upset' about 'losing his EV mandate' — i.e., the $7,500 consumer tax credit that has long made buying or leasing electric vehicles such as Teslas more attractive and affordable for consumers. Musk insists he is concerned only with the legislation's effect on federal spending — namely, initial estimates that showed it would 'massively increase the already gigantic budget deficit [by] $2.5 trillion (!!!) and burden America[n] citizens with crushingly unsustainable debt,' as he wrote last month on X. 'I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore,' Musk continued. 'This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it.' When a revised version of Trump's bill passed the Senate earlier this month with an even heftier $3.3 trillion deficit projection, Musk unveiled his America Party scheme. 'Independence Day is the perfect time to ask if you want independence from the two-party (some would say uniparty) system!' he wrote on X. 'Should we create the America Party?' More than a million X users responded to Musk's snap poll; 65% said yes; 35% said no. 'By a factor of 2 to 1, you want a new political party and you shall have it!' Musk vowed the following day. Of course, there's more to launching a third party than posting about it on social media. And so far, it appears that Musk hasn't taken any of the steps required to get his America Party off the ground. For one thing, Musk can't officially start a new party until after 2028. Like Perot, a new, independent presidential candidate would first have to secure ballot access nationwide; in many states, they would actually have to compete in the 2028 election — and earn enough votes — to keep that ballot access. Then, and only then, could the so-called America Party petition the Federal Election Commission to become a real national political party — again, like Perot did with his Reform Party in 1995, three years after his initial presidential run. In the meantime, Musk could file with the FEC to start an 'America Party' political committee to assist his preferred candidates. In fact, some filings under that name did appear on the FEC website right after Musk's X announcement; two even list Tesla CFO Vaibhav Taneja as treasurer and custodian of records. But according to Musk, those filings are bogus. For now, the America Party seems short on substance. All we know is that Musk himself could never be its presidential candidate; he was born in South Africa, and the U.S. constitution requires the president to be 'a natural born Citizen.' And, at least to start, the party might not even concern itself with the presidency. 'One way to execute on this would be to laser-focus on just 2 or 3 Senate seats and 8 to 10 House districts,' Musk hypothesized on July 4. 'Given the razor-thin legislative margins, that would be enough to serve as the deciding vote on contentious laws, ensuring that they serve the true will of the people.' It depends how you define 'successfully.' The Libertarian Party launched in 1971 and fielded its first presidential ticket the following year. By 1980, it had clinched ballot access in all 50 states. It remains America's third-largest political party today. Yet none of its recent presidential candidates have earned more than 3.3% of the national vote. Meanwhile, the Reform Party slowly collapsed after the high-water mark of Perot's 1996 campaign (8.4%). In 2000, it briefly flirted with Trump before nominating Pat Buchanan (0.4%). By the time Ralph Nader joined forces with the Reform Party four years later, it had lost its ballot line in all but seven states. Nader won just 0.38% of the vote. The most successful third party, at least on the presidential level, was the Progressive (or 'Bull Moose') Party. In 1912, former Republican President Theodore Roosevelt broke with his protege and successor William Howard Taft and decided to run for a third term. Ultimately, Roosevelt earned 27% of the national vote — more than Taft (23%) and any other third-party candidate in U.S. history. But note that it took a figure as familiar and well-credentialed as a former president to get that far — and even he didn't win. Because Roosevelt and Taft divided the GOP, Democrat Woodrow Wilson wound up flipping the White House with just 42% of the vote. 'I think it's ridiculous to start a third party,' Trump told reporters earlier this month. 'The Democrats have lost their way, but it's always been a two-party system, and I think starting a third party just adds to confusion.' 'Third parties have never worked, so he can have fun with it — but I think it's ridiculous,' the president added. The idea of another option — something different from business as usual — is perennially popular. According to Gallup, a full 58% of Americans said last October that the United States needs a third party because Republicans and Democrats 'do such a poor job' representing their interests. Over the past two decades, that number has averaged 56%; in 2023 it hit a record high of 63%. Likewise, 43% of Americans told Gallup last year that they identify as independents rather than Democrats (28%) or Republicans (28%) — a number that has been rising for some time, especially among younger voters. The problem is that the vast majority of self-described independents are actually just loyal Republicans or Democrats in disguise — and the few that remain generally seem unwilling to 'waste their vote' by casting it for a non-Democrat or non-Republican. Political data journalist G. Elliott Morris recently attempted to estimate the size of Musk's potential coalition by taking the total U.S. voter pool and subtracting hardcore Republicans (24%), hardcore Democrats (32%), soft Republicans (22%) and soft Democrats (20%). The America Party was left with less than 2% of the vote. When Morris took a slightly different approach — removing (1) devoted partisans (67.5%); (2) any remaining pro-Trump voters (14%); (3) any remaining pro-spending voters (16%); and (4) any remaining anti-Musk voters (1.75%) — the America Party wound up with an even smaller slice of the electorate (0.75%). Which isn't to say that Musk has zero chance of 'disrupting' America's partisan status quo the way he's already disrupted electric vehicles and space technology; no other third-party maestro has ever had his $400 billion fortune or his social-media megaphone. Earlier this month, Nate Silver of the Silver Bulletin expressed skepticism about anchoring a new party to milquetoast 'No Labels' centrism — but suggested Musk could find some long-term success by exploiting 'blind spots in the major party agendas' on forward-facing issues such as AI and the fertility crisis. 'That's what I'd be thinking about instead of just wanting to get revenge on Trump, or applying a template for third parties that has failed so often before,' Silver said. In the meantime, perhaps Musk will start that political committee after all — and spend millions in the 2026 midterms lavishly funding challengers to MAGA lawmakers who backed Trump's big, beautiful bill (while lambasting them on X). If he does, he could potentially spoil the election for the GOP, according to a new poll by Echelon Insights, and head into the 2028 cycle with some third-party momentum. 'The way we're going to crack the uniparty system is by using a variant of how Epaminondas shattered the myth of Spartan invincibility at Leuctra,' Musk predicted on X. 'Extremely concentrated force at a precise location on the battlefield.' Or he could simply go back to posting about other things on X and wait for everyone to forget about his latest big promise — as he has been known to do in the past.
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Elon Musk wants to start a 3rd party — the America Party — to take on Trump and the Democrats. Could it work?
In 1992, Ross Perot — a billionaire frustrated with America's ballooning budget deficits and fed up with its two-party system — ran for president as an independent. He won 19% of the vote against the Republican incumbent (George H. W. Bush) and his Democratic challenger (Bill Clinton). A few years later, Perot formed a third party — the Reform Party — and ran again in 1996 as its first White House nominee. Now Tesla CEO Elon Musk, another frustrated billionaire, seems to want to follow in Perot's footsteps and build an even bigger, better third party of his own. 'When it comes to bankrupting our country with waste & graft, we live in a one-party system, not a democracy,' the world's richest man wrote earlier this month on X, the social media platform he owns. 'Today, the America Party is formed to give you back your freedom.' Is Musk serious? And could his plan really work? It wasn't so long ago that Musk was calling himself Trump's 'first buddy.' After spending more than $250 million to help his friend win the 2024 election, Musk spent the first few months of Trump's second term waging a largely unchecked war against the federal bureaucracy as head of the newly formed Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). But then in early June the two tycoons had a major falling out over Trump's 'One Big, Beautiful Bill.' Trump claims Musk was 'upset' about 'losing his EV mandate' — i.e., the $7,500 consumer tax credit that has long made buying or leasing electric vehicles such as Teslas more attractive and affordable for consumers. Musk insists he is concerned only with the legislation's effect on federal spending — namely, initial estimates that showed it would 'massively increase the already gigantic budget deficit [by] $2.5 trillion (!!!) and burden America[n] citizens with crushingly unsustainable debt,' as he wrote last month on X. 'I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore,' Musk continued. 'This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it.' When a revised version of Trump's bill passed the Senate earlier this month with an even heftier $3.3 trillion deficit projection, Musk unveiled his America Party scheme. 'Independence Day is the perfect time to ask if you want independence from the two-party (some would say uniparty) system!' he wrote on X. 'Should we create the America Party?' More than a million X users responded to Musk's snap poll; 65% said yes; 35% said no. 'By a factor of 2 to 1, you want a new political party and you shall have it!' Musk vowed the following day. Of course, there's more to launching a third party than posting about it on social media. And so far, it appears that Musk hasn't taken any of the steps required to get his America Party off the ground. For one thing, Musk can't officially start a new party until after 2028. Like Perot, a new, independent presidential candidate would first have to secure ballot access nationwide; in many states, they would actually have to compete in the 2028 election — and earn enough votes — to keep that ballot access. Then, and only then, could the so-called America Party petition the Federal Election Commission to become a real national political party — again, like Perot did with his Reform Party in 1995, three years after his initial presidential run. In the meantime, Musk could file with the FEC to start an 'America Party' political committee to assist his preferred candidates. In fact, some filings under that name did appear on the FEC website right after Musk's X announcement; two even list Tesla CFO Vaibhav Taneja as treasurer and custodian of records. But according to Musk, those filings are bogus. For now, the America Party seems short on substance. All we know is that Musk himself could never be its presidential candidate; he was born in South Africa, and the U.S. constitution requires the president to be 'a natural born Citizen.' And, at least to start, the party might not even concern itself with the presidency. 'One way to execute on this would be to laser-focus on just 2 or 3 Senate seats and 8 to 10 House districts,' Musk hypothesized on July 4. 'Given the razor-thin legislative margins, that would be enough to serve as the deciding vote on contentious laws, ensuring that they serve the true will of the people.' It depends how you define 'successfully.' The Libertarian Party launched in 1971 and fielded its first presidential ticket the following year. By 1980, it had clinched ballot access in all 50 states. It remains America's third-largest political party today. Yet none of its recent presidential candidates have earned more than 3.3% of the national vote. Meanwhile, the Reform Party slowly collapsed after the high-water mark of Perot's 1996 campaign (8.4%). In 2000, it briefly flirted with Trump before nominating Pat Buchanan (0.4%). By the time Ralph Nader joined forces with the Reform Party four years later, it had lost its ballot line in all but seven states. Nader won just 0.38% of the vote. The most successful third party, at least on the presidential level, was the Progressive (or 'Bull Moose') Party. In 1912, former Republican President Theodore Roosevelt broke with his protege and successor William Howard Taft and decided to run for a third term. Ultimately, Roosevelt earned 27% of the national vote — more than Taft (23%) and any other third-party candidate in U.S. history. But note that it took a figure as familiar and well-credentialed as a former president to get that far — and even he didn't win. Because Roosevelt and Taft divided the GOP, Democrat Woodrow Wilson wound up flipping the White House with just 42% of the vote. 'I think it's ridiculous to start a third party,' Trump told reporters earlier this month. 'The Democrats have lost their way, but it's always been a two-party system, and I think starting a third party just adds to confusion.' 'Third parties have never worked, so he can have fun with it — but I think it's ridiculous,' the president added. The idea of another option — something different from business as usual — is perennially popular. According to Gallup, a full 58% of Americans said last October that the United States needs a third party because Republicans and Democrats 'do such a poor job' representing their interests. Over the past two decades, that number has averaged 56%; in 2023 it hit a record high of 63%. Likewise, 43% of Americans told Gallup last year that they identify as independents rather than Democrats (28%) or Republicans (28%) — a number that has been rising for some time, especially among younger voters. The problem is that the vast majority of self-described independents are actually just loyal Republicans or Democrats in disguise — and the few that remain generally seem unwilling to 'waste their vote' by casting it for a non-Democrat or non-Republican. Political data journalist G. Elliott Morris recently attempted to estimate the size of Musk's potential coalition by taking the total U.S. voter pool and subtracting hardcore Republicans (24%), hardcore Democrats (32%), soft Republicans (22%) and soft Democrats (20%). The America Party was left with less than 2% of the vote. When Morris took a slightly different approach — removing (1) devoted partisans (67.5%); (2) any remaining pro-Trump voters (14%); (3) any remaining pro-spending voters (16%); and (4) any remaining anti-Musk voters (1.75%) — the America Party wound up with an even smaller slice of the electorate (0.75%). Which isn't to say that Musk has zero chance of 'disrupting' America's partisan status quo the way he's already disrupted electric vehicles and space technology; no other third-party maestro has ever had his $400 billion fortune or his social-media megaphone. Earlier this month, Nate Silver of the Silver Bulletin expressed skepticism about anchoring a new party to milquetoast 'No Labels' centrism — but suggested Musk could find some long-term success by exploiting 'blind spots in the major party agendas' on forward-facing issues such as AI and the fertility crisis. 'That's what I'd be thinking about instead of just wanting to get revenge on Trump, or applying a template for third parties that has failed so often before,' Silver said. In the meantime, perhaps Musk will start that political committee after all — and spend millions in the 2026 midterms lavishly funding challengers to MAGA lawmakers who backed Trump's big, beautiful bill (while lambasting them on X). If he does, he could potentially spoil the election for the GOP, according to a new poll by Echelon Insights, and head into the 2028 cycle with some third-party momentum. 'The way we're going to crack the uniparty system is by using a variant of how Epaminondas shattered the myth of Spartan invincibility at Leuctra,' Musk predicted on X. 'Extremely concentrated force at a precise location on the battlefield.' Or he could simply go back to posting about other things on X and wait for everyone to forget about his latest big promise — as he has been known to do in the past.
Telegraph
4 days ago
- Politics
- Telegraph
Reform has proven again it is unfit to tackle our immigration crisis
Does anybody in Reform know why people vote Reform? It's a question that seems increasingly uncertain. But it's relatively simple to understand: immigration, immigration, immigration. It is clarity and conviction on this single issue that is driving voters away from the mainstream parties and toward the one that, in Nigel Farage, finally seems willing to say what needs to be said – and to do what is necessary. But despite reducing immigration being their central policy, their commitment to it is barely surviving contact with reality – even as an opposition party. Earlier this year Zia Yusuf's replacement as Party Chairman, Dr David Bull, used one of his first media appearances after being appointed to announce that 'immigration is the lifeblood of this country, it always has been'. Meanwhile Linden Kemkaran, the leader of the newly Reform-controlled Kent County Council, has written to the Government to lobby against a tightening of rules on migrant workers. Kemkaran, along with the council's cabinet member for adult social care and public health, Diane Morton, wrote to Home Secretary Yvette Cooper and minister for care Stephen Kinnock to raise 'grave concerns' about the proposals in the new Immigration Bill. Those proposals, in particular, were to close the health and social care visa route to overseas applicants, which Kemkaran argued could 'leave providers on a cliff edge'. The Leaders' call was seconded by the leader of the Lib Dem group on the council. The health and social care visas have been a disaster, and one of the primary drivers of the catastrophic Boriswave: low-wage, low-productivity, high-exploitation migration that has undercut British workers and locked the country into an unsustainable dependency on increasing migration flows from low-wage economies. Despite the visa route bringing in more people than the entire population of Montenegro, or a city the size of Bristol, care vacancies are now higher than when the social care worker visa launched. One in four foreign care workers has been found to abuse UK visa rules. There was a tenfold rise in investigations in the care sector by the labour exploitation watchdog in just two years. There was an implicit understanding that Reform councils would be under stricter control from the party HQ than their mainstream equivalents, and would be used to demonstrate their willingness to use what limited powers councils have to fight on totemic issues like immigration. Ahead of May's election, Yusuf admitted that Reform might not be able to prevent asylum seekers from being housed in hotels where the Home Office already holds contracts. However, he said, the party would attempt to block such accommodations using 'judicial reviews, injunctions, and planning laws.' That commitment, it seems, has already begun to unravel – at the worst possible moment. In an electoral landscape where voters have already cast off one Right-wing party for betraying its promises on immigration, showing weakness on this issue is more than just a misstep; it is a threat to Reform's entire raison d'être. The question Reform must answer is simple: if they can't hold the line on immigration in opposition – under no real pressure, with no real power – why should anyone trust them to do it in power? The British public have learned to spot a sheep in wolf's clothing.
The Independent
09-07-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
‘It's not something you do by posting on Twitter': Man behind Ross Perot's campaign gives Musk third-party advice
The man behind Ross Perot's 1992 presidential campaign is offering Elon Musk advice on building a third-party following the announcement Musk is creating what he calls the America Party. Perot, a billionaire Texas businessman, ran on Reform Party ticket in 1992, and garnered about 19 percent of the popular vote, helping former President Bill Clinton oust then-President George H.W. Bush. In 1996, Perot received close to 8.5 percent of the vote. His 1992 effort is the most successful independent bid for the presidency in modern history. Perot's Reform Party also elevated former wrestler Jesse Ventura to become the governor of Minnesota for a term between 1999 and 2003. At the time, Ventura was the first Reform Party candidate in the nation to win a statewide office. Russell Verney, a former chair of the Reform Party, advised Perot, and wasn't optimistic about Musk's political future when speaking to Politico. 'It's not something you do by posting on Twitter that you have a political party. It takes a lot more work than that,' he told the outlet. Perot's push for deficit reduction changed the political landscape and fueled Clinton's efforts to achieve a balanced budget. Musk could achieve similar results. 'My basic advice is: Go to rehab and then focus on creating a new political party from a position of seriousness, not of anger, not of retribution, not of retaliation,' said Verney. The former Perot adviser argued Musk isn't actually creating a political party. 'He's creating a political committee that is going to encourage people to run and may make independent expenditures on their behalf,' Verney told Politico. 'A political party essentially has a big structure, and the most important asset of a political body is ballot access — in other words, the right to place the name of its candidate on the general election ballot. Musk doesn't have that.' Verney went on to note that while candidates themselves will need to get ballot access Musk can 'assist' them in doing so. 'Third parties don't have to win to be effective,' said Verney, recounting how Perot explained deficit spending and the national debt to the public. President Clinton balanced the budget for the first time since the Eisenhower administration, he noted. It hasn't been balanced since those two years during the Clinton administration. 'That was the result of the support Perot got,' said Verney. The former Reform Party chair said political candidates only care about elections and, as such, want to 'co-opt' the voters attracted by a position, such as reducing the deficit and the national debt. 'All candidates really stand for is elections. It's not about progress. It's not about making America great. It's just about elections,' he said. Verney said Musk can have a 'big impact' on both the Republicans and the Democrats if his candidates 'start coming up with a coherent message and start showing some support.' You can only petition the Federal Election Commission to become a national party after getting ballot access in enough states. And to get ballot access in many states, you have to get votes, Verney argued. 'The Reform Party did that. The Libertarian Party did that. There are lots of others that have tried and failed,' he said.
Atlantic
09-07-2025
- Politics
- Atlantic
Another Angry Billionaire Wants His Own Political Party
This is an edition of The Atlantic Daily, a newsletter that guides you through the biggest stories of the day, helps you discover new ideas, and recommends the best in culture. Sign up for it here. If you're old enough, you've seen this movie: An eccentric billionaire, full of bile and nursing grudges against the incumbent Republican president, wants to create a third major political party and shake up the system. In 1992, the billionaire was H. Ross Perot, and his vehicle for attacking the incumbent president, George H. W. Bush, was something called the Reform Party. Perot had a few good ideas; he wanted to balance the federal budget, for example, which is never a bad thing. But mostly, he was something of a rich crank who had a vendetta against the Bush family: In one of many strange moments, Perot claimed that his abrupt exit from the race in the summer of 1992 was because Bush had been plotting a smear campaign against his daughter, something for which he never offered proof. It wasn't a very good movie, and it certainly didn't need a reboot, but we might be getting one anyway. Elon Musk has announced the formation of the 'America Party,' a new political organization whose main idea is … well, the goal isn't clear. Musk hasn't said much about it, other than that it would be dedicated to stopping wasteful government spending. But mostly, his announcement seems dedicated to aggravating President Donald Trump, with whom Musk has had a very public falling out. And Trump is plenty aggravated. 'I am saddened to watch Elon Musk go completely 'off the rails,' essentially becoming a TRAIN WRECK over the past five weeks,' Trump wrote on his Truth Social site on Sunday, adding that the 'one thing Third Parties are good for is the creation of Complete and Total DISRUPTION & CHAOS.' Trump's trademark punctuation aside, the president has a point, at least about the possible disruption of the GOP. Even if Musk is serious—and one never knows with planet Earth's richest jumping jester —the odds of this new party coming into existence are low: Third parties don't get much traction in the U.S. political system. The chances that it will become a force in American politics are even lower. But if that's the case, why is Trump so angry? A few days later, perhaps realizing how panicky his initial reaction sounded, Trump changed his tune. 'It'll help us,' he said of Musk's new party. And here, Trump is wrong: If Musk creates a new party to appeal to disaffected members of the now-defunct coalition that he, Trump, and some of the MAGA movement all cohabited, such a party—if it has any impact at all—is likely to hurt Republicans more than Democrats. Musk is a deeply unpopular figure in American politics, but what public support he enjoys comes heavily from the GOP itself. For now, he seems to be taking Perot's approach, rooting the America Party in anger about the bloated and irresponsible One Big Beautiful Bill that Trump and the Republicans squeaked through Congress. But who's the audience for this appeal? It's not big business or economic conservatives; Musk's record as a business leader has taken a major hit, and those groups have already thrown in their lot with Trump and the GOP. It's not the national-security Republicans, who know that Musk is no better than the fringiest and most isolationist Trumpers when it comes to foreign affairs. It's certainly not the Never Trumpers, who, if Musk even wanted their support in the first place, would never forget his sycophantic embrace of Trump. The real worry for Republicans is that Musk will peel off small numbers of people in two groups, both of them important to Trump's grip on Capitol Hill. One group consists of swing voters who don't much like Trump but who have stayed with him for various reasons; Musk might be able to get them pumped up about another celebrity movement. They could be swayed by Musk's supposed anger about budgets the same way some of them bought into arguments about egg prices and inflation, allowing Musk's candidates to shave away a few points here and there from the GOP. But more worrisome to the Republicans is that Musk will corner the crackpot vote. When Musk first broke with Trump, he claimed on X that the president was named in files relating to Jeffrey Epstein, the pedophile who committed suicide in prison and with whom Trump had a long friendship. Some of Trump's supporters, including FBI Director Kash Patel, had earlier teased the possibility of great revelations from 'the Epstein files.' Then they gained power and perhaps realized that some of these files either didn't exist or didn't contain anything explosive. Musk might sense that he should avoid openly courting this part of the Trump coalition, but it's too late: The MAGA fringe will likely see a natural ally in Musk anyway, not least because Musk engaged in various forms of conspiracism even before he tried to play the Epstein card against Trump. If a number of people in MAGA world think the 'deep state' is even Deeper and Stater now that it's ostensibly captured administration officials who were once trusted by Trump supporters, such as Attorney General Pam Bondi, they are going to look for a new vehicle for their beliefs. Musk and his party could fit that bill. But the actual damage to any party is likely to be small. Even if Musk could present himself as the face of fiscal conservatism, that's not enough to sustain a party in the age of reality-TV politics. Musk can form a party, but he can't run for president as its head, preventing him from taking the Green Party gadfly Jill Stein's role as the spoiler in American elections. Even Perot at the height of his influence won only 19 percent of the popular vote in the 1992 election; he didn't gain a single electoral vote, and his Reform Party exists now mostly as memorabilia that people have stashed in attics for some 30 years. (He tried again in 1996. He got 8 percent of the popular vote.) In the end, this whole project is likely to go nowhere, and I will admit that this suits me fine as an American who likes the two-party system and distrusts third parties in general—even if I am no longer a member of either major party. When I used to teach political science, I would remind students that large parties are meant to serve a useful purpose of aggregating interests, rather than dividing them. Big parties in a winner-take-all system (where the person who gets the most votes wins the seat outright) force people with differing agendas to get along with one another and accept compromises in order to elect candidates who might not be acceptable to any one of them but who overall represent their general desires. Independent and swing voters can make similar judgments, joining or leaving coalitions in various elections. The party system in America has problems: Too many people don't vote—especially in primaries—and many of those who do vote don't comprehend even the rudiments of the issues before them. A fair number of voters have also embraced cruelty and ignorance as virtues. But these are social problems, not constitutional or structural issues. If Musk throws billions of dollars into creating a party that siphons off voters who think the name DOGE was a clever acronym and who worry about chemtrails, thus weakening Trump's power in the short term, so be it. But another party headed by another billionaire who doesn't understand the Constitution, the U.S. government, or democracy itself is not the path to a healthier nation. Here are three new stories from The Atlantic: The 'Russia hoax,' revisited He spent his life trying to prove that he was a loyal U.S. citizen. It wasn't enough. The David Frum Show: The courts won't save democracy from Trump. Today's News At least 119 people are dead after the flash flood in central Texas; 161 people are still missing from one county alone, according to officials. President Donald Trump sent letters to seven more countries threatening tariffs as high as 30 percent. Russia launched its largest drone attack on Ukraine last night, with 728 drones and 13 missiles, according to Ukraine's air force and its president. Evening Read The Work of Caring for My Daughter Will Never Be 'Efficient' By Julie Kim After Izzy was diagnosed, in 2018, I wrote about my grief over not knowing if she would ever talk, walk, or recognize me as her mother. I still grieve those milestones. Yet I also marvel at Izzy's many accomplishments: how she has mastered navigating the busy menus on her 'talker,' an augmentative communication device provided by the New York City Department of Education; her stamina during physical-therapy sessions, wedged into breaks between classes; how during social studies, her least-favorite subject, she has figured out that pointing at her diaper and then the exit sign will promptly get her out of class. I am confident that she knows and loves me, even if she might not fully grasp that I'm the one who birthed her. At the same time—and here I think of her orbit of loving teachers, therapists, and other caregivers, particularly those at her school—I would not be surprised if Izzy believes, deep down, that she has many mothers, of which I am but one. Culture Break Watch. My Mom Jayne (streaming on HBO Max) is a documentary about Jayne Mansfield directed by her daughter Mariska Hargitay. It's also a reminder that the star was more than the next Marilyn Monroe. Enjoy the show. When Hulk Hogan turned heel, pro wrestling—and America?—was never the same, James Parker writes.
