The New Ross Perot? Elon Musk Is Creating the American Party

The rift is widening between US President Donald Trump and one of his main supporters , billionaire and the richest man in the world, Elon Musk, who made a significant contribution to his election victory.

The confrontation has long been public and periodically escalates. During the conflict that flared up on social networks, the head of the White House called the entrepreneur crazy, and the businessman responded by saying that the American leader is present in classified documents on the Jeffrey Epstein case. According to the psychologist, the reason for the split was revenge and narcissism . Musk claims that he changed his mind about Trump because of the president's economic policies.

The row erupted over the American leader’s “Big Beautiful Law.” The document is a large-scale package of tax breaks, primarily for corporations and wealthy individuals. Although it does not include direct cuts to subsidies and social programs, the consequences of the reform have created political pressure to cut budget spending, including the social sphere.

On July 4, the US Independence Day, Trump signed the law, having previously secured its approval in the Senate. In his opinion, this will help to significantly reduce budget expenditures. Musk, on the contrary, believes that the law will only increase the US national debt. By the way, many of his projects are directly related to government subsidies.

In response to the billionaire's attacks, people from Trump's circle have repeatedly hinted to the businessman about the possibility of deportation. The president himself did not rule out that a federal investigation could be launched against the entrepreneur, launched through DOGE, which Musk headed after its founding.

"No, brother, you are not American. You are South African, and if we take enough time and prove the facts of this, you should be deported because this is a crime that you committed — among many others," said former Trump adviser Steve Bannon .

On US Independence Day, the businessman conducted a poll asking whether it was worth creating an American party ("Party of America"). More than 1.2 million users of his social network X (blocked in Russia) took part in it, and 65.4% of respondents supported the idea.

In the first stage, Musk is not aiming to control Congress, but will focus on individual states with the goal of getting 2-3 senators and 8-10 representatives. In this way, he hopes to get the “golden share” — the key share of votes without which neither Republicans nor Democrats will be able to pass decisions on their own.

The businessman posts and reposts messages about his intention to break the one-party system that, in his opinion, exists in the United States. He emphasized that this is not a democracy.

Musk promises to focus on reducing the national debt while maintaining what he calls “responsible spending.” His plans include modernizing the military with AI and robotics, accelerating the development of artificial intelligence, and massively deregulating government. He also intends to promote free speech and measures to stimulate the birth rate. Musk says the party will take a centrist course on most key issues.

In one of his reposts, he recalled that he was advised not to create a rocket company and launch production of electric cars, because it would not work. In this context, the creation of a party was also added.

Musk has already filed an application with the Federal Election Commission (FEC). In order to gain official status and participate in the elections, his brainchild must meet a number of requirements - a process that may take time.

Meanwhile, the American Party website has appeared, but for now it looks like a one-pager repeating the billionaire's main points. On his social media page, the businessman discusses the location of the first congress and promises that it will be fun.

"Ah. Too bad. Musk is wrong. He won't succeed with the Third Party. They've been trying to create a Third Party for 200 years and no one has succeeded, because that's how the political system in the US is structured. It would be better if Elon apologized to Trump and returned to his team," says political scientist Sergei Markov .

"For some reason, the phrase of deputy Urazhtsev, spoken in August 1991 to Yanayev, immediately popped into my head: "What about Genka? The putsch will fail," noted German Klimenko, co-chairman of the Council of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of the Russian Federation for the Development of Digital Technologies and the Digital Economy.

"Musk has no political structure, nor experience in creating one. So far, his calls are more reminiscent of Kanye West's or Mike Bloomberg's recent forays into politics. The latter burned a billion dollars during his 2020 campaign. As a result, he received 1% and withdrew from the elections," emphasized American political scientist Malek Dudakov , but he specified that if Musk does not get bored, he could create problems for Republicans and Democrats in some districts and states.

"This is not just hype or technological PR, but a real step towards trying to change the two-party system in the US with the help of media and digital influence... Musk is moving from the status of a technological visionary and Internet libertarian to the role of an independent political player... And let's also remember Hollywood - there were striking examples when stars with huge popularity and media influence were unable to gain a foothold in real politics. And here the main test is whether Musk will be able to convert digital capital into real political success," explained political strategist Ramil Kharisov , who believes that Musk has powerful resources in the form of a gigantic digital reach: if his idea works, it will change the rules of the game in world politics, and if not, it will be the most expensive and spectacular experiment.

"This is all-in, of course. What will it mean for Musk? Triumph and a return on a white horse to the White House, or collapse and deportation (or maybe something worse)? We'll find out soon," added media technologist Konstantin Dolgov .

It is worth noting that after leaving the White House and the conflict with Trump, Musk's ratings have been falling. According to the results of a July Silver Bulletin poll, 37% of Americans have a positive attitude towards the billionaire, 55.1% - a negative one. In a poll by the Economist and YouGov , conducted from June 6 to 9, 80% of Democrats and 67% of Republicans expressed a negative attitude towards Musk (76% a week earlier). In a YouGov poll, when choosing between Musk and Trump, 28% of respondents would choose the current head of the White House, 8% - the businessman, but 52% of respondents would not vote for either of them. By the way, the overwhelming majority of Republican voters sided with Trump in the conflict.

There are about 40 political parties in the US, and it is quite easy to create them. Such structures not only exist, but also achieve results. These successes are local in nature, but such political organizations have little chance of reaching the national level, not to mention the prospects of becoming a third force.

"It is extremely difficult to break through the bipartisan firewall. You need to collect a lot of signatures, find strong candidates and spend a lot of money," Dudakov explained.

The reason is the winner-takes-all system of counting. Thus, regional parties cannot compete with Democrats and Republicans for seats in the Senate and House of Representatives due to a lack of resources, although in isolated cases they succeed. Electoral reform could change this, but neither of the major US parties is interested in this.

At the same time, one should not underestimate the potential of politicians who are neither Democrats nor Republicans. For example, they can act as "spoilers" who take away some of the votes from candidates of one of the main parties.

It’s worth noting that there are independent candidates, too. Vermont has had Bernie Sanders elected to the House of Representatives and then the Senate for decades. Another modern example is Senator Angus King of Maine. In both cases, they are forced to side with one of the party factions (in these examples, the Democrats), but both senators use their independent status to appeal to voters who are disillusioned with the major parties.

The current situation in the United States is reminiscent of the events of 1992. Then, billionaire and philanthropist Ross Perot ran for president of the United States as an independent candidate. The non-systemic player challenged the political establishment. There is an opinion that he was a spoiler candidate, thanks to which Bill Clinton won the presidential race.

Note: Musk is not eligible to run for US President, as this is a US-born election.

Perot won 19% of the vote, but it was evenly distributed across the states, which is why he did not win any of them. This is the best result for an independent candidate in 80 years: in 1912, after a split in the Republican Party, Theodore Roosevelt, who returned to politics, created the Progressive Party. Roosevelt himself then took second place in the presidential election, and his party was able to get ten members and one senator into the House of Representatives.

By the way, the last representative of the "third force" in the USA who managed to win in several states was Alabama Governor George Wallace, who ran for the American Independent Party. He gained 13.5% of the votes, won in five states and secured the support of 46 electors.

In 1996, Perot ran for president again, having founded the Reform Party (1995). He failed to repeat his success, receiving 8.4% of the vote. In 1996, 1998, and 2000, the Reform Party tried to get into Congress, but without success. In 1998, its candidate, former wrestler Jesse Ventura, unexpectedly won the gubernatorial election in Minnesota.

It is noteworthy that Donald Trump considered joining the Reform Party when he was planning to run for president. He later abandoned the idea due to conflicts within the party and went to the Democrats for eight years.

It is worth noting that since Roosevelt's time, several parties have managed to gain a foothold in Congress. The Socialist Party of America, the Farmer-Labor Party, the Progressive Party of Wisconsin, and the American Labor Party (which operated in coalitions) had their representatives — all of them before 1950. Only the New York State Conservative Party made its way into Congress later — in 1970, its representative became a senator.

The history of American politics convincingly proves that “third forces” are not an anomaly, but a natural symptom that appears in moments of acute crisis of the two-party system and deep discontent of society. Although they rarely manage to win the highest posts, their true power lies in the ability to reveal painful problems that have been ignored for some time by the giant competitors.

At the core of Musk’s similarity to Perot is the archetype of the genius billionaire patriot, confident in his own exceptionalism. Perot was a tough, no-nonsense businessman with a Texas grip who saw himself as the only one who could “get under the hood” and fix America. Musk, for his part, cultivates the image of a visionary engineer solving planetary problems, for whom politics is just another complex but solvable system.

Both possess the unique, non-classical charisma of an unsystemic leader. Perot’s main weapon is the charm of a straightforward and sharp-tongued Texas pragmatist. He did not try to be a smooth politician; on the contrary, his sharp phrases, simple analogies, and the appearance of a “successful grandfather who speaks the truth to your face” created a sense of authenticity and inspired trust.

His performance in the debate with Bill Clinton and George H. W. Bush in 1992 became legendary: many viewers thought he had won, and the billionaire’s popularity soared. In 1996, Perot was barred from the debates because the Commission on Presidential Debates, a private organization controlled by Democrats and Republicans, had instituted a new rule that required a contestant to have a realistic chance of winning. At the time, Perot had about 15 percent of the vote. It was a classic defense of the two-party system.

Musk's charisma is different, it's the charm of a techno-messiah and a rebellious genius, capable of putting on a bright show that will be talked about all over the world. His sometimes awkward behavior in public and love of memes are perceived not as weakness, but as a sign of an authentic mind, unfettered by political correctness. He attracts not with promises, but with the audacity of ideas.

The national debt became a central theme for both entrepreneurs. For Perot, it was the core of the entire campaign: using simple charts and cards, he depicted the national debt as a time bomb beneath the American economy. Musk, criticizing both Democrats and Republicans (including Trump), does exactly the same thing, calling unrestrained spending a direct path to collapse.

Both Perot and Musk are big businessmen with tech interests who used the era’s dominant communications technology to speak directly to the people. Perot, who made his fortune in tech services, bought up airtime en masse for his famous half-hour “infomercials.” Musk, a leader in the space and automobile industries, uses his own global social network, X, as his personal “TV channel,” broadcasting to millions of subscribers without filters or intermediaries.

Their methods are direct, unfiltered communication with voters, creating a sense of dialogue. Perot appeared on talk shows and took calls live on air, speaking to people like a manager would to employees. Musk does the same digitally through polls, memes, and short answers on X, creating a constant stream of information around him and demonstrating that he hears the “voice of ordinary people” better than out-of-touch politicians.

Ideologically, both Musk and Perot are committed pragmatists who disdain party dogma. Their platform is a mix of fiscal conservatism (strict control of debt and spending), economic libertarianism (less regulation), and populism. They promote the idea that there are no left or right solutions, only common sense and the incompetence of uni-party politicians who pretend to fight while in reality leading the country to ruin together.

Elon Musk is raising the banner of a “third force” to challenge the two-party system in the United States, but behind the rhetoric there is no structure or team. His journey increasingly resembles that of Ross Perot: a genius outside of party lines, a billionaire with a mission. Musk is fighting not just Trump, but the political machinery built to marginalize his kind. It may be all show, or it may be the beginning of the most expensive political campaign of the 21st century. The only question is how long it will take for Musk to get bored.