Musk’s America Party: Personal grievance or political movement?

Triggered by US President Donald Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill”, Elon Musk, the world’s richest man, has turned from being the president’s “political kingmaker” to “political disruptor” by forming the America Party to challenge the two-party system.

While the chances of Musk founding a successful political party are far slimmer than going to Mars, the significance of the “America Party” is its ability to draw votes away from the Republican camp. 

Yet it also risks casting a shadow over Tesla. The company’s board and shareholders are unlikely to welcome Musk’s growing political involvement. Amid investor concerns over potential damage to Tesla’s relationship with the government, the company’s stock fell nearly 7% on 7 July. But as the stock rises and falls, Musk remains unfazed — continuing to tweet and wade into politics as if market reactions were someone else’s problem.

While Musk is widely known for Tesla, Starlink and SpaceX, few realise his passion for politics. Musk became a US citizen in 2002 — the same year he used some of the proceeds from the sale of PayPal to eBay to launch SpaceX. 

Yet political engagement has accompanied his entire career. In 2016, Musk donated to Hillary Clinton’s campaign and publicly endorsed her, criticising Trump as “not the right guy”. Between 2002 and 2012, SpaceX spent over US$4 million lobbying Congress. Unlike most tech startups, SpaceX has been lobbying in Washington almost since its inception.

In May 2022, Musk alleged that the Democratic Party has become a “party of division and hate” and announced he would vote Republican. In July 2024, just about 30 minutes after an assassination attempt on Trump, Musk officially and fully endorsed him, posting on X: “I fully endorse President Trump and hope for his rapid recovery.” He also congratulated Trump on selecting JD Vance as his running mate.

During Trump’s campaign, Musk became a regular guest at Mar-a-Lago and contributed over US$290 million to the campaign, leading US media to portray Trump as a puppet, with Musk as the puppet master. At Trump’s inauguration parade, Musk declared, “My heart goes out to you.”

Musk also benefited from Trump. Before Trump’s second term began, federal agencies had launched at least 32 investigations into Musk’s companies. But after Trump appointed Musk to lead the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), most of these investigations were effectively halted. 

For example, in 2024, the US Department of Labor’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) began auditing Tesla to ensure adherence to equal employment laws for federal contractors. This is because the company has been widely criticised as a hostile workplace filled with rampant racial bias and instances of sexual harassment. Yet Trump effectively eliminated the OFCCP in his first week in office, ending the investigation into Tesla.

However, when Musk realised that Trump’s policies hurt the interests of his companies, he did not hesitate to break up with him. Tariffs were the main point of contention. Trump’s tariffs on China affected Tesla’s Shanghai gigafactory both in terms of importing components and exporting vehicles. In March, Tesla China’s sales fell 11% year-on-year, and it exported just 4,701 units. Musk naturally opposed the tariff war, which explained his harsh criticism of White House trade advisor Peter Navarro. In early April, Musk even called Navarro “truly a moron” and “dumber than a sack of bricks”.

But what Musk found even more unacceptable was the “One Big Beautiful Bill”, which would eliminate US$7,500 tax credits for buying or leasing new electric vehicles by 30 September. With Americans already hesitant about electric vehicles due to concerns over range, cost and inadequate charging infrastructure, the removal of subsidies will certainly hurt sales.

Other reasons for Musk’s dissatisfaction with Trump included Trump’s refusal to let him continue his role at DOGE, the Federal Aviation Administration’s hesitation towards the Starlink satellite system, and Trump’s withdrawal of the nomination of Musk ally Jared Isaacman for NASA chief.

It is evident that Musk’s move was driven largely by personal interest, and the America Party appears to lack a clear platform or coherent ideological foundation — indicators of a politically immature venture. The timing alone raises questions: would Musk have launched this party if the “One Big Beautiful Bill” had not excluded electric vehicles?

Musk criticised the bill under the banner of reducing government debt and curbing excessive spending, but such slogans are far from enough to turn the America Party into a viable political force against the Republicans. The US debt crisis is not the result of any single party or individual. While the “One Big Beautiful Bill” is projected to raise the deficit by US$3 trillion over ten years, the Democrats have also played a role in fuelling the debt.

A key feature of Bidenomics is aggressive industrial policy, and one of President Joe Biden’s first acts in office was signing a US$1.9 trillion Covid relief plan — a massive spending move that set the tone for his administration. Against this backdrop, Musk’s slogans appear hollow, offering no serious alternative or solution.

Thanks to Musk’s charisma, the America Party has managed to attract some support. In a Fox News poll from April, about 72% of Republican voters backed his actions. Among independents, 26% supported his budget-cutting stance, though 56% viewed him negatively. Even so, gaining just a fraction of Republican and independent voters could still make the America Party a force to reckon with in elections.

However, a YouGov online poll in early June showed that Americans sided more with Trump than Musk in their dispute: 28% supported Trump, only 8% backed Musk, and 52% supported neither.

The America Party poses no real threat to the two-party system. US elections operate on a winner-takes-all, single-member district model, where the candidate with the most votes in each district wins — not necessarily the majority. This structure naturally reinforces a two-party system and makes it extremely difficult for third parties to gain traction. This is simply a rule of thumb. Faced with multiple candidates, voters often worry that voting for their preferred third-party option will split the vote and inadvertently help the major party they oppose win.

Musk is widely seen as a political “disruptor” motivated primarily by self-interest — a stark contrast to figures like Bernie Sanders. While Sanders’ socialist platform may be controversial or even unrealistic to some, it is clearly rooted in ideology rather than personal gain.

Musk’s shift from kingmaker to disruptor appears driven by a desire to protect his own business interests. Which is why, to many, the America Party feels hollow — and why Musk might be better off sticking to what he does best: building companies, not political movements.

This article was first published in Lianhe Zaobao as “马斯克为个人私利驱动美国党”.

Related: Tech won the market. Now it wants the state? | Elon Musk’s political misadventure ends in public ruin | Trump-Musk joint reforms and the American constitutional crisis