The Dictatorship
What Elon Musk isn’t getting about America’s political party system
Elon Musk has officially declared his intent to launch a new political partyan announcement long on bravado but short on substance.
Our Founding Fathers didn’t even want political parties, which they called “factions.” George Washington warned against them and Alexander Hamilton railed against them. But once Thomas Jefferson and John Adams began aligning their political interests with their electoral ambitions, the foundation for America’s two-party system was laid.
The American political system isn’t just hostile to third parties, it is structurally designed to destroy them. Since that race between Federalist John Adams and Democratic–Republican Thomas Jefferson in 1800, we’ve been locked into a two-party system and have not looked back. Neither Democrats nor Republicans have any intention of clearing a path for a viable third, fourth or fifth option.
Starting a political party in America isn’t just a branding exercise. It’s a slog through 50 states, plus five inhabited territories, each with its own ballot laws, deadlines, filing requirements and thresholds for signature gathering and registration — and that’s just to get recognized. Musk wouldn’t be starting a political party; he’d be starting 55 political parties.
Starting a political party in America is a slog through 50 states, plus five inhabited territories.
That’s expensive. A good estimate for the bare minimum needed to build a party that can compete locally and nationally is three-quarters of a billion dollars — more than two and a half times what Musk spent helping elect Donald Trump in 2024. And all that does is satisfy the various legal and logistical requirements such as ballot access, staffing and organizing.
To put this in business terms Musk can understand, that’s how much you’ll have to spend just to create your corporation. You still have to develop and produce a product.
A political party must have an identity to succeed. When I became chairman of the Republican Party in 2009, it was in disarray. We had been hammered in the 2006 midterms and the 2008 presidential election. Donors were fleeing, the grassroots were demoralized and the party infrastructure was fraying. I worked hard to rebuild the party, focusing on the values it had championed from Reagan to George W. Bush.
I had the advantage of an existing brand identity that voters could reconnect with as well as local to statewide political infrastructure. Musk will be starting from ground zero. If anything, he might be starting off underground, as his personal reputation is at its lowest point after taking a chainsaw to federal agencies that helped fight disease, feed the hungry and educate our children.
I also had the advantage of a national network of like-minded Republicans willing to roll up their sleeves and pitch in. Parties require leaders at the state and county level, policy platforms that reflect something bigger than a personal grudge and candidates willing to carry that banner into battle. That means recruiting thousands and thousands of people doing jobs that can’t be automated by AI or offloaded to paid consultants.
All of these tasks would be a challenge for even the most dedicated political crusader. The ideal person to helm this effort would have a clear and popular political agenda, a sharp analytical mind that’s not easily distracted and loads of charisma, plus billions of dollars to burn. Musk has just one of those qualities.
This is a man known for initiating chaotic firings with little notice at Twitterselling Cybertrucks with windshield trim panels that fall off and building rockets that explode on the launchpad. He’s been fined by the Securities and Exchange Commission for intemperate tweets and turned his much-hyped AI chatbot into a Hitler-praising monster.
In short, he is not the guy.
I’m not saying this as a die-hard partisan. I actually would like to see a viable third party give the Democrats and Republicans a run for their money. I believe we could even see that in our lifetimes if we move toward ranked-choice voting, a national popular vote or other reforms.
But let’s be clear: the real problem is structural. Our two major parties built a system designed to keep everyone else out. Cracking it open requires more than a billionaire’s checkbook. It requires a grassroots movement, citizen by citizen, willing to do the hard work of rebuilding democracy outside of the Republican and Democratic parties.
In a country where even well-organized third-party efforts have been tried and failed, Musk’s gambit may reveal less about our broken politics and more about his personal pique with Donald Trump. The way I see it, this particular third party is a party of one.
For more thought-provoking insights from Michael Steele, Alicia Menendez and Symone Sanders-Townsend, watch “The Weeknight” every Monday-Friday at 7 p.m. ET on BLN.

Michael Steele is a co-host of “The Weeknight,” which airs Monday through Friday at 7 p.m. ET on BLN. He is a former lieutenant governor of Maryland and a former chairman of the Republican National Committee.
The Dictatorship
Iran moves to take permanent control of Strait of Hormuz, a vital shipping choke point
Iran announced on Thursday that it was drafting a “protocol” that would allow it to “monitor transit” by oil tankers through the Strait of Hormuzthe strategic waterway Tehran has shut downsending oil and gas prices soaring in the U.S. and across the world.
Kazem Gharibabadi, Iran’s deputy foreign minister for legal and international affairs, said tanker traffic through the narrow route “should be supervised and coordinated” between Iran and Oman, the two countries that border the strait, according to a translation of a report from Iran’s state news agency cited by CNBC.
“Of course, these requirements will not mean restrictions, but rather to facilitate and ensure safe passage and provide better services to ships that pass through this route,” Gharibabadi said according to the report.
President Donald Trump has suggested that the U.S. may leave it to other countries to end Iran’s de facto blockade of the strait, which it enforces by firing missiles at tankers. Trump has called on European nations to do so, but experts say Europe lacks the military resources to halt Iranian attacks on tankers for the long term.
Iranian and Omani officials did not respond to requests for comment from MS NOW.
For decades, the strait has been an international waterway, controlled by no country, that ships from all nations could transit.

Gregory Brew, a senior Iran and oil analyst at the Eurasia Group, said that if Iran manages to take control of the Strait of Hormuz permanently, it would be a “colossal win” for the country.
“It’s a massive strategic win, given that Iran has demonstrated that it can close the strait,” Brew told MS NOW. “It’s a huge financial win.”
Brew added that if Iran gains long-term control of the straitit would be more powerful than it was before the Trump administration attacked it. Iran’s parliament passed a law to begin charging “tolls” of up to $2 million per ship, which could mean as much as $100 billion in annual revenue — or the equivalent of Iran’s current annual oil export earnings.
“It’s not innocuous,” Brew said, referring to the protocol announced on Thursday. “Iran has passed legislation and is now claiming to be coordinating with Oman in establishing joint management of the Strait of Hormuz.”
Brew predicted that Oman, which has less oil and wealth than other Gulf nations, may be willing to accept a temporary arrangement that could help end the conflict.
“The Omanis are probably hedging; they’ve always tried to manage their relationship with Iran, and they lose relatively little by cooperating with Iran right now to ease pressure on the strait,” Brew said. “The bigger question is whether they continue to cooperate after the war.”
Ted Singer, a former senior CIA official who oversaw the agency’s operations in the Middle East, said Iranian officials are likely trying to see what they can achieve.
“I wouldn’t see this as a fork in the road,” Singer told MS NOW.
Singer, who served as a CIA station chief in five different countries over a 35-year career, said Iranian officials could be trying to stoke division between gulf countries.
“The Iranians are good at doing more than one thing at a time,” he said. “Why not stake out a maximalist position on tolls, then toss out options to roil the waters?”
The United Arab Emirates, for example, is adamantly opposed to Iran taking control of the strait.
“The Iranians play multi-dimensional chess,” said Singer, now a senior adviser to the Chertoff Group, a security consulting firm run by Michael Chertoff, who served as secretary of Homeland Security in the George W. Bush administration.
“Try to create division between Oman and the rest of the Gulf countries,” Singer said. “Why not fiddle around with this and see if something sticks?”

David Rohde
David Rohde is the senior national security reporter for MS NOW. Previously he was the senior executive editor for national security and law for NBC News.
Ian Sherwood is the director of international newsgathering for MS NOW, a former executive editor for NBC News and a former deputy Washington bureau chief for the BBC.
The Dictatorship
Thursday’s Mini-Report, 4.2.26
Today’s edition of quick hits.
* Targeting Iranian infrastructure: “President Trump celebrated the destruction of a bridge near Tehran on Thursday, warning on social media that there was ‘much more to follow.’ The attack on the B1 bridge between Tehran and the nearby city of Karaj killed eight people and wounded 95, according to Fars, a semiofficial Iranian news agency.”
* I don’t think the speech worked: “The price of oil rose sharply and stocks wavered on Thursday after President Trump, in an address from the White House the day before, said the war against Iran was ‘nearing completion’ but failed to offer a concrete timeline and committed to more attacks. In the 19-minute address, Mr. Trump said U.S. forces would hit Iran ‘extremely hard over the next two to three weeks.’”
* Reversing one of Noem’s worst ideas: “Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin on Wednesday rescinded a rule that DHS expenditures over $100,000 be personally approved by his office, ending a widely criticized policy implemented by his predecessor Kristi Noem that critics said put a particular burden on the Federal Emergency Management Agency ’s work aiding disaster response and recovery.”
* The latest on the ballroom: “Donald Trump’s handpicked National Capital Planning Commission voted Thursday to authorize the president’s plan to erect a gilded 90,000-square-foot White House ballroom in place of the historic East Wing, which was destroyed last fall to make way for the ballroom.”
* Remember when Congress, by constitutional mandate, had the power of the purse? “President Donald Trump said Thursday he will soon sign an order to pay all Department of Homeland Security employees who have gone without paychecks during the record-long partial government shutdown that has reached 48 days.”
* A year after “Liberation Day,” there’s fresh tariff news: “President Donald Trump announced Thursday he will levy tariffs as high as 100 percent on some name-brand pharmaceuticals and is adjusting tariffs on products that contain steel and aluminum, the administration’s first move to expand duties since the Supreme Court dealt his trade agenda a blow in February.”
* The latest from Artemis II: “NASA’s latest update about the Artemis II moon mission shows a breathtaking view of Earth as the Orion capsule with four astronauts on board orbits tens of thousands of miles above. Hitching a ride beyond Earth’s atmosphere atop NASA’s powerful Space Launch System rocket, the three Americans and one Canadian selected for the mission are preparing to begin heading toward the moon.”
See you tomorrow.
Steve Benen is a producer for “The Rachel Maddow Show,” the editor of MaddowBlog and an MS NOW political contributor. He’s also the bestselling author of “Ministry of Truth: Democracy, Reality, and the Republicans’ War on the Recent Past.”
The Dictatorship
Judge weighs legality of Trump’s planned arch near Arlington National Cemetery
A federal judge is weighing whether the Trump administration can legally build a 250-foot arch just across the Potomac River from the Vietnam and Lincoln memorials, as three veterans who fought in Vietnam have argued the project would violate federal law and permanently alter one of the country’s most sacred landscapes.
Judge Tanya Chutkan declined on Thursday to issue a preliminary injunction, instead asking the parties to report by 5 p.m. on Friday whether they can agree to halt groundbreaking while the case proceeds. If no agreement is reached, she will ask the executive branch to provide supplemental sworn declarations disclosing any awards, grants, contracts, permits or other relevant information related to the arch’s construction.
The suit was brought by three Vietnam War veterans and an architectural historian, who argued the project would obstruct views of the Vietnam War and Lincoln memorials from Arlington National Cemetery. The plaintiffs contended the planned arch would violate federal laws governing historic sites and monuments, and the White House cannot lawfully proceed without congressional authorization.
The plaintiffs cited Trump’s various Truth Social posts and public statements to support their claim that construction is underway, pointing to design specifications, a target completion date of July 4 and renderings backed by a White House fact sheet. They also argued the National Park Service must sign off on any use of the land before construction begins.
President Donald Trump told reporters in January that his proposed arch “will be the most beautiful in the world,” and is already “being built.” He also shared renderings of the arch on his Truth Social account.
The government’s attorney, Bradley Craigmyle, argued that Trump’s media and social media statements constitute hearsay. Chutkan pushed back sharply, saying Trump’s posts are admissible as statements by a party. Throughout the hearing, Craigmyle argued the project is in the conceptual phase despite the president’s statements.
Today’s hearing comes as the National Capital Planning Commission voted 9-1, with two abstentions, to approve construction for Trump’s 90,000-square foot ballroom at the White House, clearing the final procedural hurdle for the project. Chutkan referenced the ballroom case during the hearing, saying, “If we haven’t had the whole White House ballroom situation, this might be a little more academic than it is now.”
Selena Kuznikov contributed to this article.
Peggy Helman is a desk associate at MS NOW.
-
Politics1 year agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics1 year agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
The Dictatorship7 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words
-
Politics1 year agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
Uncategorized1 year ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
Politics12 months agoDemocrat challenging Joni Ernst: I want to ‘tear down’ party, ‘build it back up’





