Gordon L. Weil
In the political off season, if that still exists, people
often turn to dreams of a new party. As
soon as any frustrated player talks about forming a new political party, they
are scolded for not recognizing how difficult it is and that new parties don’t
work.
Now comes Elon Musk, whose foreign birth would deny him the
presidency, but who wants to create the America Party.
Ignore him, and maybe he’ll go away. Maybe not. Maybe he is sending a message. He is not proposing a “third” party. That’s because there are no political parties
left standing.
The traditional Republican Party no longer exists. It was seized by Donald Trump, who is
Republican in Name Only. The remnants of
the former Republican establishment are defeated and dispersed. The vote on the
One Big Beautiful Bill is prime evidence of the Trump monolith overriding
traditional GOP concerns about the debt.
“I am not a member of any organized political party. I’m a
Democrat,” said cowboy philosopher Will Rogers.
The party has no program, other than opposing Trump, no leader, and no
unity. It governs a minority of states,
which may matter little in the face of Trump authoritarian rule.
The Democrats’ progressive wing wants to move the party
toward a larger role for government and higher taxes on the wealthy with the
funds being used for social policies.
Traditional Democrats are more conservative, competing with the GOP more
effectively, they say, for blue collar voters.
The problem with the Democrats is that too many believe that
being opposed to Trump is all it takes to win.
Both major, but dying, parties fear what they see as a third
party that could capture voters who would normally support one or the other of them. In 1992, independent Ross Perot may have
taken supporters away from both sides. Having
learned that lesson, each attacks new party advocates.
Many voters are discontent with what they see as the
government’s failure to respond to their concerns about their economic
condition and outlook. They want change,
which explains the successes of Barack Obama and Donald Trump.
Trump provides change.
Instead of a hope, voters have the reality. The talk of a third party reveals that some voters
have found that, in their desire for change, they gave Trump a blank
check. Musk believes he has the formula
and the funding to offer change without Trump.
But the third-party movement misses the point, especially
when the strongest anti-Trump sentiment comes from extreme fiscal conservatives
like Kentucky GOP Sen. Rand Paul and extreme liberals like Vermont Democratic
Sen. Bernie Sanders. There’s no third
party that would accommodate both.
The answer is likely not a third national party but a series
of alternatives. The Trump opposition
could be formed out of a combination of movements. Different solutions could work among
different electorates.
In the upcoming 2026 congressional elections, Musk’s party
could field candidates in targeted districts.
Despite Musk’s maverick image, these candidates, holding views on trade
and economic policy akin to traditional Republican conservatives, could either win
seats, defeat Trumpers or hand districts to Democrats by splitting the GOP.
More independent candidates could run. Maine makes the case. It has elected two independent governors, one
of whom now sits in the U.S. Senate.
That’s at least theoretically possible in 2026 with a strong independent
now in the governor’s race. In Nebraska,
an independent candidate has a strong chance for a Senate seat.
The chief appeal of independents is not that they are moderate,
taking a position between the two parties, but that they are not part of the
parties. Their independence, a
willingness to find practical, non-ideological solutions, may represent an
appealing version of change.
Another element of the alternative effort would be
philanthropy. The New York Times has
reported about a group of foundations that will support opposition to
authoritarian moves by the Trump administration. While they are outside of the partisan
process, their role provides indirect help to Trump’s opponents.
Private funding also supports efforts to get people to the
polls. The Republican Party openly tries to discourage voter participation in
the belief that marginal voters are likely to support Democrats. Gerrymandering runs wild. To effectively
oppose Trump, getting out the vote may be far more important than other actions,
including a third party.
In next year’s congressional elections, the Democrats or at
least an anti-Trump coalition ought to be able to take control of the House,
now held by a tiny GOP majority. Some
Democratic unity would help. If Trump’s
authoritarianism has succeeded in creating widespread opposition, the real test
would come in flipping GOP Senate seats.
Musk has a point. At
the same time, he misses the point. A single,
unified party is not the solution to Trumpism; an array of alternatives may be.
