With the “Big Beautiful” bill officially taking effect, on July 5th local time, American entrepreneur Elon Musk made a high-profile announcement on social media to establish a new political party independent of both the Republican and Democratic parties—the “American Party.”
Previously, Musk had repeatedly proposed ideas for the “American Party” through social media, such as: it would represent “80% of the middle-class voters” in America; it would participate in the midterm elections in 2026; and initially, it would focus on securing 2 to 3 Senate seats and 8 to 10 House seats, becoming a “key minority” in Congress.
On the day after the announcement of the “American Party,” Trump publicly responded that the United States has always been a two-party system, stating, “A third party has never worked,” and Musk’s creation of the “American Party” is “utterly absurd.”
What exactly is the “American Party”? Can it challenge the existing two-party system in the United States?
In response to this, Liu Haichao, Associate Professor at the School of Politics and International Relations, Lanzhou University, conducted a comprehensive interpretation.
Currently, Musk’s direct reason for declaring the establishment of the “American Party” is the elimination of electric vehicle subsidies by the “Big Beautiful” bill signed by Trump, which severely damaged Tesla’s interests. However, an analysis of public information suggests that Musk’s political move was not entirely unexpected.
Politically speaking, Musk’s support for new energy and technological developments aligns with the Republican Party’s stance, whereas he shares many commonalities with the Democrats. However, during the Biden administration, Musk became particularly disdainful of the Democrats due to personal grievances, including being overlooked and family changes. Therefore, during Trump’s campaign, Musk spent $259 million supporting the Republican team, which surprised Trump.
With the global tariffs imposed by Trump after his inauguration harming Musk’s globalization strategy, and Musk’s frequent interference with administration leading to dissatisfaction, the relationship between the two gradually deteriorated. Eventually, Musk formally resigned on May 31st, bringing their conflict into the public eye.
In the week following his resignation (June 5th), Musk initiated a social media poll calling for the establishment of a new political party. The online vote received over 810,000 net supporters on July 4th, indicating that establishing a new party was a natural progression.
It is important to note that although Musk claimed to be organizing a “United States Party” national convention, details such as how it would be run, when it would take place, and how the “United States Party” would be set up remain unknown. American media commentators have pointed out that it remains unclear how far the “United States Party” can go.
If Musk truly establishes a “United States Party,” in practice,
The U.S. political landscape includes many third-party parties besides the two major ones. For instance, the Libertarian Party, which has been dubbed the “third-largest party” by American media, has 650,000 registered voters and over 200 members holding public office since its establishment in 1971. In fact, it is relatively mature, with an annual budget of $1 million to $3 million. Therefore, Musk’s intention to establish a new political party should not pose a problem from a budgetary standpoint. However, achieving a “third way” in the United States is challenging.
Firstly, legal procedures present significant challenges.
To establish a new political party in the U.S., one must register separately at the state level, meaning registration in all 50 states. Due to significant differences in regulations across states, most require collecting signatures from voters (numbers vary by state) or submitting valid signatures amounting to 1.1 million or more.
Some states require electoral votes from voters, with strict registration requirements. For example, Arkansas requires that a political party secure at least 3% of the vote in the previous state election before being registered, and the state elections are held every four years. It took nearly 20 years for the “Liberal Party” to complete its registration in Arkansas; only after the state-level process is completed can one proceed into what’s known as federal procedures, which involve submitting an organization application to the Federal Election Commission and meeting the voter eligibility criteria of at least 12 states. Only after passing these reviews can a party nominate candidates for federal-level elections. Each step within this process is complex and takes several years, making it impossible to complete by mid-2026.
The United States is a two-party system, where almost all laws prioritize the two major parties. Even if a third party is established, its chances of winning in elections are slim. This is because under the “single-member district” and “winner-takes-all” rules, there is only one winner per congressional district, and small parties, even with voter support, struggle to secure electoral votes during general elections. For instance, in 1992, independent candidate Pelosi received nearly 19% of the popular vote but only 0 electoral votes in the final election; Trump once considered the idea of forming a third party called “Patriot Party,” but it was ultimately abandoned.
The American Party itself is also facing internal and external challenges.
Internally, the foundation of the American Party is weak.
Its voter profile is not as clear-cut as that of the Republican or Democratic parties, lacking a deep grassroots and realistic base of supporters.
Externally, the political environment faced by the American Party is severe.
As a political party, its most important policy ideas and propositions are currently quite vague, opposing Trump while overlapping partially with the Democratic Party’s ideology, leading to some supporters being absorbed by the Democrats. Many American commentators have pointed out that Musk actually has limited space for policy proposals.
Recently, Trump has announced the formation of a “Super PAC” specifically targeting and opposing Musk. Whether this new political party can withstand the pressure from the Republican Party remains uncertain.
Moreover, Musk’s actions in the Department of Government Efficiency, such as massive layoffs of government departments and civil servants, questioning the income status of some congressional members, have also offended many members of the American political scene. It is unknown whether his preparations for the “American Party” or subsequent elections will be constrained by staff members.
**Do you think Musk’s capital influence can translate into political influence?**
Before Trump took office, Musk already had significant political influence. For example, through orders for rocket launches and the Starlink system’s low-cost communication, not only did it save the military a lot of money but also made contributions to the Ukrainian warfront, having a deep cooperative relationship with the US military; plus, being a wealthy individual, he also enjoys celebrity status.
However, Musk himself faces many bottlenecks. For instance, according to US law, individuals can freely fund Super PACs but cannot directly fund a political party, meaning Musk’s vast wealth cannot be directly used for party activities, leading to the frustration of “having money but not being able to donate.” Furthermore, he was born in South Africa and acquired US citizenship after 2002.
In terms of legality, he cannot directly run for president (violating Article 2 of the US Constitution). If a new political party is established, what is his relationship with it? Will he introduce new representatives to run for election or will there be core elites involved? These issues are currently undisclosed by Musk.
Some American commentators have pointed out that personal fame does not help. They advise Musk to avoid wasting time and energy on new political parties and suggest taking a “shortcut,” such as collaborating with other political parties. Currently, some centrist parties are extending olive branches to him, with the Democratic Party showing a clear wait-and-see attitude. He himself has not made any statements, and further observations await.
**Besides political barriers, what difficulties does Musk face in other aspects?**
1. Musk, after all, is an entrepreneur; establishing a political party is for the sake of commercial interests. Over the past six months, Tesla’s stock price has fluctuated frequently, and the board of directors has expressed their discontent and dissatisfaction with him, more importantly, the industry has suffered.
For Musk, as his assets are damaged, it not only leads to a decline in his political influence but also further harms his commercial interests. For instance, if his cooperation with enterprises in South America loses its support from the U.S. government, they might be nationalized by the Chilean government, affecting his raw materials and the entire supply chain. Moreover, Trump’s “bigger is better” policy will cancel subsidies for new energy vehicles and threaten with cancellation of government orders, making Musk’s situation even more difficult.
What progress might there be for the “American Party”?
The “American Party” remains a paper game at present, with low likelihood of actual implementation. Musk’s core goal remains to protect his commercial interests rather than truly disrupting the two-party system. Therefore, it is highly probable that Musk will continue to postulate on social media about his “strategies,” continuously testing what kind of policies are attractive to voters.
However, Trump’s “businessman president” image is quite evident. Previously, Musk promised substantial funding to the Republican Election Committee, which has not yet been fully received. If Musk relaxes his political stance and supports Trump’s midterm elections again, Trump’s change of mind is normal. In the long run, the situation between the two parties may reverse, and this awaits observation.