Andrew Yang
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2024-08-21
  • CNN political analyst Van Jones wants to “Make [Wakanda](https://www.fastcompany.com/90812389/how-hannah-beachler-designed-the-world-of-wakanda-forever) real” with his new initiative, the Dream Machine Innovation Lab. When it comes to overlooked communities, Jones believes artificial intelligence isn’t an access to hardware problem—almost everyone has a smartphone—but rather a matter of the heart and mind, a “wetware” problem. Alongside the U.S. presidential election, empowering who innovates with the next era of technology will determine our future. _This is an abridged transcript of an interview from_ [Rapid Response](https://mastersofscale.com/episode_category/rapid-response/)_, hosted by former_ Fast Company _editor-in-chief Robert Safian. From the team behind the_ Masters of Scale _podcast,_ Rapid Response _features candid conversations with today’s top business leaders navigating real-time challenges. Subscribe to_ Rapid Response _wherever you get your podcasts to ensure you never miss an episode._ **You’re launching a new initiative, this Dream Machine Innovation Lab, to address the impact of AI on underrepresented communities. Is there a connection for you between what’s going on in the political world and what’s going on in the tech world?** There is a big connection because if you’re waiting for politics and politicians to fix this stuff, you’re going to be waiting for a long time. In the last century, you could be excused for having a more state-oriented, government-oriented view of change. Because in the last century, you had politicians, political figures, Churchill, you know, JFK, FDR, Dr. King. These were political people who were either politicians or protesters trying to make governments work better, trying to get the New Deal done so working families could have some support, trying to get civil rights and women’s rights done so that we really all can be seen as created equal. These are all the tasks of government. What political figure is there on the world stage right now that you think is up to the task of even being a good dog catcher or city council member? Compared to the challenges that we’re facing: catastrophic global warming, the rise of all these authoritarian governments, the United States kind of falling all over itself and infighting . . . And the political class is not up to this fight. Meanwhile, who are the people really shaping tomorrow? It’s not the politicians, it’s the technologists. The technologists are the ones who are basically creating a new human civilization right before our eyes. Look, I’ve got two kids from my first marriage. One’s in college, one’s in high school. But I’ve also, in my new relationship, I’ve got two little babies, 2 and a half years old and 6 months old. By the time they’re my age, they will be living in a different human civilization. Their first crushes or best friends might be AIs. When it’s time for them to have kids, they might use biotech tools to design their kids. They might be buried on the moon or on Mars. All of that is different than where I grew up. I was born in 1968. This is all _Jetsons_ stuff. And yet, that’s what’s being created. Now, my local congressperson has very little leverage on that. I’m sorry, but there’s about 10,000 people in the AI community. They’re going to have a much bigger impact on all of that than any 10,000 politicians. And so, that’s why will.i.am and I got together and said, “Let’s launch a campaign to try to get the next generation of young minds, especially from Black and brown and other overlooked communities, get them focused on AI.” So we have a campaign called “Make Wakanda Real,” trying to excite the imagination of young people. What if you could use all these technology tools to solve problems? Wakanda being the incredibly technologically advanced super-nation in the superhero universe of Marvel. What if you could make that real? And so it’s a vote of confidence in the future in that we think that technology can be used for good. **If the driving force of creating this future is tech, like Black representation in tech, Black people make up maybe 8% of tech employees and like 3% of tech C-suite executives. I mean, the creators of this future don’t necessarily represent all of us.** It’s bad. And it’s dangerous. It’s not, “Oh, it’s terrible for the poor Black people.” Though it is. “Oh, it’s terrible for the Native Americans and whatever.” Though it is. It’s terrible for everybody. The last time we let one little group determine human civilization, we had 400 years of slavery, colonialism, environmental destruction. You don’t want that. But I’ll tell you this—and this is gonna get me in trouble with some of my liberal friends, at least at the consumer level—we call it the digital divide. We’ve been talking about that for 20, 30 years. It is no longer a hardware issue for a lot of America. I’m not saying you don’t have some deserts, \[but\] most people have a smartphone. They could download ChatGPT. They could download Midjourney. It’s not so much a hardware problem, it’s a wetware problem. It’s in your mind, in your brain, in between these two ears. “Do I believe that this stuff is for me? Do I believe that this technology is supposed to be in my hands? Or is it for someone else? Is it for the white folks? Is it for the rich folks?” That’s a wetware problem. Is it corny? Or is it cool? That’s a wetware problem. And so we’re trying to have a campaign that looks at some of these African American communities, Latino communities, Native American overlooked, underestimated, Appalachian. You’ve got creative people. You’ve got resilient people. You’ve got grit. You’ve got determination. You’ve got innovative people. What if you gave those communities the most creative tools ever imagined and told them, “This is not a hand grenade. This is a jetpack for you.” You don’t have to go to four years of college and then go beg somebody for a bunch of capital. A lot of what you’re doing now is you’re replacing capital with code. **For this presidential election, there have been strong words on both sides about the repercussions if the other candidate is elected. What do you think’s at stake?** I really do think you have very stark differences between these candidates. There always are differences, but I think the direction of society is at stake. If the very worst potential in Donald Trump would come out, I don’t want to find out in his next presidency, but I don’t want to find out because if it did, he’s already tested and strained American institutions to the point of breaking. The worst of Kamala Harris would be more aid and comfort to really obnoxious people on the left who think they’re better than everybody. And you know, talk down to people. That strikes me as survivable. The worst that comes from Kamala Harris is maybe too much government spending, maybe a tax policy that punishes innovation in a way, at least in the eyes of the innovators and entrepreneurs. That sucks, but you can then hire somebody else to be president in four years. It’s survivable. The worst from Donald Trump, I don’t know. That takes 50 years to fix, 20 years, 100 years. I mean, how do you fix that stuff? So I think it’s very, very consequential. **The state of the electorate is part of what makes me so anxious, that there are so many people who adamantly believe that one candidate is a crook, and you can find lots of people on both sides who will make that argument about the other candidate. I guess I was hoping that business leaders would take up the middle and mend some of that. But it seems like that’s kind of subsided, and business folks are just like, “Yeah, I don’t want to piss anybody off.**“ I think that the business community, when \[Joe\] Biden was clearly incapable of running and certainly incapable of serving, and the bite of taxes at the very, very top created permission structure for a lot of people in the business community to move in directions that are just very scary to me. Elon Musk, he was an Andrew Yang supporter in 2020. So four years ago, Elon Musk was supporting an innovation-first Democrat. And now he’s clearly to the right of Trump, and I think imagines himself maybe being some kind of an oligarch in some more authoritarian country. That is terrifying to me. I like Elon Musk when he’s trying to figure out how to get to space and how to make clean cars and how to get innovation in government going with Andrew Yang. That’s a massive asset to humanity. I’d like to see a lot more of the old Elon Musk. **Well, power sometimes does strange things to people, right?** I’d like to find out. If I can get some more power, I’ll let you know how it goes. But in the meantime, I just get to talk about the people who do have it. _Apply to the [Most Innovative Companies Awards](https://www.fastcompany.com/apply/most-innovative-companies) and be recognized as an organization driving the world forward through innovation. Early-rate deadline: Friday, August 23._
2024-08-28
  • Five days before Donald Trump defeated Hillary Clinton to win the 2016 U.S. presidential election, I wrote a story that [turned the presidential politics clock back to 1992](https://www.fastcompany.com/3065162/1992-the-year-presidential-campaigning-went-online). That was the first year the campaign had a digital element—particularly for underdog candidates such as former Irvine, California, Mayor Larry Agran. Unable to get mainstream news outlets to pay attention to his bid, Agran did something no would-be president had ever done. He held a press conference that was virtual, because it took place on CompuServe, the largest online service of the time. Agran went on to get fewer than 60,000 votes in Democratic primaries. But other candidates also added a digital element to their campaigns, including President George H.W. Bush and Democratic nominee Bill Clinton. An article in CompuServe’s print magazine said such high-tech outreach efforts might help transcend “politics’ high-gloss superficiality and the ‘sound-bite’ orientation of the mass media.” In a term redolent of the dial-up age, it called the trend “modemocracy.” In retrospect, there’s something touchingly naive about those early expectations. Some 32 years later, a massive chunk of how we experience presidential elections has moved online. Yet the process has hardly grown more sober and fact-oriented as a result. Particularly since the advent of social media, it’s gotten even shallower, as takes, screeds, and clips scroll by in our feeds, sometimes interspersed with misinformation and outright disinformation. That brings us up to 2024, and the first presidential election of the generative AI era. As the year began, a deepfaked President Joe Biden [robocalled New Hampshire voters](https://www.fastcompany.com/91020077/ai-deepfakes-taylor-swift-joe-biden-2024-election) telling them not to vote. Trump, once again the Republican nominee, has both [shared deepfakes](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/aug/19/trump-ai-swift-harris-musk-deepfake-images) and falsely accused Vice President Kamala Harris of using AI to [fake a rally crowd](https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2024/aug/12/donald-trump/why-trumps-claim-that-the-harris-campaign-used-ai/). On X, Elon Musk [shared a video featuring a synthesized Harris voice](https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2024/aug/12/donald-trump/why-trumps-claim-that-the-harris-campaign-used-ai/) without making clear it was a parody; he also unveiled [a new image generator](https://www.theverge.com/2024/8/14/24220173/xai-grok-image-generator-misinformation-offensive-imges) that users immediately put to work creating imaginary photos of Trump, Harris, and others in improbable situations. Most of this presidential election’s fakes haven’t been terribly convincing if you’re paying attention; we’re probably lucky that the technology hasn’t been used to even more chilling effect (so far). Still, like social networking before it, artificial intelligence shows no signs of ennobling the sacred rite of American democracy in action. You can’t fault 1992’s techno-optimists for not anticipating the advent of deepfakes decades later. They also wouldn’t have known what to make of pressing 2024 online debates such as whether [Harris is brat](https://www.fastcompany.com/91161535/kamala-harris-memes-marketing-to-gen-z). But even in the early ’90s, it occurred to some people that the online services of the time didn’t exactly reflect American society at large. An article by _Businessweek_’s Evan I. Schwartz [quoted](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/1992-03-15/putting-the-pc-into-politics) Clem Bezold, executive director of the Institute for Alternative Futures think tank: “How many poor people have Prodigy or CompuServe?” Even among more affluent types, going online was a pricey, fairly exotic hobby—CompuServe, the biggest of the services, cost $12.80 an hour and had fewer than a million users, not all of whom partook in its political aspect. Today, our digital culture still bears only so much resemblance to life in its traditional form. Among the terminally online, 2020 Democratic contender [Andrew Yang](https://www.fastcompany.com/90452713/math-obsessed-andrew-yang-should-be-thrilled-with-these-twitter-hashtag-numbers) and 2024 Republican [Vivek Ramaswamy](https://www.wired.com/story/vivek-ramaswamy-campaign/) were favorite sons of their respective races. Outside that bubble, neither fared anywhere near so well among voters at large. Maybe you think that proves something is broken about our electoral politics, but it’s still evidence of a disconnect. Of course, the internet isn’t one big bubble—it’s a bubble of bubbles. Last week, when Musk conducted a [“super unscientific” presidential poll](https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1826015426658415033?s=61) of his X followers, Trump (whom Musk has [endorsed](https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1812256998588662068)) crushed Harris, 74% to 26%. That result says more about Musk’s fan base than it does about the consensus of all X users, and I feel slightly dumber just for having paid attention to it at all. Especially after I dredged up a June 1992 column by the _St. Louis Dispatch_’s William F. Woo, who thought the fact that 57% of CompuServe users supported third-party candidate [Ross Perot](https://www.fastcompany.com/90374043/how-ross-perot-helped-bring-us-the-iphone) might mean an epoch-shifting moment in American history was imminent. (Only 8% of CompuServers favored Clinton, the eventual winner.) As happy as I am not to get sucked too deeply into Musk’s particular bubble, I also worry about growing too attached to one of my own. The internet is much better at creating feedback loops than enabling the sort of shared reality that the democratic process requires, a defining dysfunction of our times that was hard to foresee in 1992. To be clear, I’m not saying I want to go back to the days when presidential campaigns were filtered almost exclusively through newspapers, magazines, broadcast TV and radio, and maybe an all-news cable channel or two. I’ve been gorging on coverage of this year’s extraordinary election that could never have existed in those days, and am pretty much addicted to podcasts on the subject. But to quote [Linus](https://www.gocomics.com/peanuts/1963/03/22), there’s no heavier burden than a great potential. And for all the ways the online world has changed our lives for the better, most of modemocracy’s promise remains unfulfilled. _You’ve been reading Plugged In,_ Fast Company_‘s weekly tech newsletter from me, global technology editor Harry McCracken. If a friend or colleague forwarded this edition to you—or if you’re reading it on FastCompany.com—you can [check out previous issues and sign up to get it yourself](https://www.fastcompany.com/section/plugged-in) every Wednesday morning. I love hearing from you: Ping me at [hmccracken@fastcompany.com](mailto:hmccracken@fastcompany.com) with your feedback and ideas for future newsletters._ _Apply to the [Most Innovative Companies Awards](https://www.fastcompany.com/apply/most-innovative-companies) and be recognized as an organization driving the world forward through innovation. Early-rate deadline: Friday, August 30._ Harry McCracken is the global technology editor for _Fast Company_, based in San Francisco. In past lives, he was editor at large for _Time_ magazine, founder and editor of _Technologizer_, and editor of _PC World_ [More](https://www.fastcompany.com/user/harry-mccracken)
2024-09-19
  • American democracy is in a fragile place. If you haven’t figured that out by this point, you haven’t been paying attention. The dangers are coming from all sides. [Donald Trump](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/donaldtrump) has just survived his second apparent assassination attempt. The governor of Ohio has had to call in the state police to monitor a spate of bomb threats to local schools after falsehoods about Haitian immigrants eating cats and dogs in the area began circulating. That’s aside from all the usual mass shootings, Proud Boy marches and the rest of it. But inside this fomenting turmoil, the most dangerous spot in the whole country, the rock on which the American state may well founder, is the quiet congressional district of Omaha, Nebraska, the very heart of the American heartland. Omaha is dangerous, not in itself, but due to the entirely weird position it inhabits inside the electoral college. In one of those strange freaks of American politics, [Nebraska](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/nebraska) has a split electoral college vote, and for the past few elections the city of Omaha has reliably voted Democrat. The other four electoral districts vote solidly Republican. Ordinarily, this little hiccup in the system wouldn’t matter much. But 2024 represents a uniquely precarious moment. As it stands, once you remove the settled Democrat and Republican states, the most direct path to a Kamala Harris victory is by way of Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. With those three states, she would receive exactly 270 electoral college seats, the number she needs to win. In that case, she would win if, and only if, she holds that one electoral college vote in the congressional district of Omaha, Nebraska. The Omaha congressional district hasn’t mattered much due to a kind of bipartisan detente, a balance of power. Nebraska is not the only state that splits its electoral system by district. So does Maine. And Maine, while mostly Democratic, has a similarly reliable Republican constituency, which will almost certainly give its electoral college seat to Trump. If Nebraska changes its system to give Trump an advantage, Maine has said it will [reciprocate](https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2024/04/26/maine-draws-a-line-in-the-sandhills-will-match-nebraska-on-winner-take-all/) in order to cancel out any attempt to shift the balance of power. Largely for this reason, the inclination to change the law has been muted in Nebraska, even though Republicans control the statehouse. Having a contested electoral college seat also makes Nebraska slightly more worthy of attention from both national parties, meaning the current division is, to some small degree, in the interests of Nebraskans on the whole. Yet that state of detente may be set to unravel. The Maine legislature has now gone out of session, and last Friday, Jim Pillen, the governor of Nebraska, made a public statement: “I strongly support statewide unity and joining 48 other states by awarding all five of our electoral college votes to the presidential candidate who wins the majority of Nebraskans’ votes,” he said. “As I have also made clear, I am willing to convene the Legislature for a special session to fix this 30-year-old problem before the 2024 election. However, I must receive clear and public indication that 33 senators are willing to vote in such a session to restore winner-take-all.” Pillen is effectively deflecting the electoral college question onto the state senators, but he is also opening the door to the possibility of the switch, which could alter the course of the election. Republicans would not even need to switch the electoral college seat to win. They only need to muddy the waters. If, for example, the Nebraska legislature ensured that their electoral college votes were in dispute, and the courts had not decided the matter by 6 January, and no one had reached the threshold of 270, that state of affairs would automatically trigger a [contingent election](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/sep/18/donald-trump-could-win-contingent-election). In a contingent election, another abstruse mechanism of the US electoral system, each state delegation, whether it’s California or Wyoming, gets a single vote, which means that the Republicans would always win. (This possibility is the subject of [a book](https://www.akashicbooks.com/catalog/last-election/) I wrote with Andrew Yang, The Last Election.) The sheer boredom of what I’m describing here, the banal technicalities of the complex legal structures in place, may, on the surface, seem less frightening than assassination attempts and bomb threats and cooked pets and armed militias. But don’t misunderstand: this is the real danger America faces. The complexity _is_ the trap. The complexity makes it easy for people to believe that somehow they haven’t been tricked, that a functioning democratic system, however bizarre, is still in place, even when it clearly isn’t anymore. It goes without saying that the nightmare I’ve described here – which could absolutely happen – is only one of several glitches in the electoral system which could undo the United States. [(Georgia is a whole other nightmare.)](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/18/us/elections/georgia-elections-board-rules.html) The Republicans have set themselves up to maximize incoherence, exactly because they are aware of the vulnerability of the system. Needless to say, incoherence of outcome is precisely the opposite of what the founders intended when they established the electoral college 240 years ago. They were living in a different world, though. The electoral college was the product of an 18th-century agrarian society whose Capitol sat a hundred miles from virgin forest. At this point in history, it is little more than a legitimacy crisis in progress. The founders built their system to avoid exactly the kind of situation that the erasure of the district Omaha, Nebraska, would represent: the possibility of democracy in bad faith and by name only. * Stephen Marche is a Canadian essayist and novelist. He is the author of The Next Civil War and How Shakespeare Changed Everything
2024-10-07
  • ![](https://imgslim.geekpark.net/uploads/image/file/cd/b1/cdb15115eab388de867816bce87862aa.PNG) 研究显示,「国民基本收入」等于每年多放一个十一长假(不调休版),从 13 薪变 12 薪 ... ![](https://bmmrk26n86.feishu.cn/space/api/box/stream/download/asynccode/?code=NWNmMWJjNjU0ZjE3OThlNWU3YmUzZmRiYzhkYjQxODBfVzQyTzdrNnM5bzVBRFduMVgxcXNZMTd1WE10cVRzV09fVG9rZW46UG9KdWJiNnZSb1BrdnV4bFlpMWNjUHM2bmhkXzE3MjgyOTA1MDk6MTcyODI5NDEwOV9WNA) 人工智能的风刮了两年,在 AI普及之前,工作的「存在主义危机」先一步到来,互联网上关于人工智能何时能取代人的工作,能取代什么工作的讨论层出不穷。在人工智能的道德伦理边界的讨论上,「警惕人工智能大规模造成失业潮,引起社会恐慌」也是其中一项
2024-11-09
  • November 9, 2024, 7 AM ET If this wasn’t the Podcast Election, it was certainly a podcast-y election. Millions of people [watched](https://x.com/maxwelltani/status/1854292715527135247) the results come in on a handful of livestreams hosted by popular podcasters, including one [hosted by Tucker Carlson](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2024-11-07/the-podcasters-who-reported-celebrated-election-night-at-mar-a-lago?utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&utm_term=241107&utm_campaign=soundbite) from Mar-a-Lago, on which Donald Trump’s sons Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump appeared as guests. Trump also enjoyed a late-breaking endorsement from Joe Rogan, host of [the world’s most popular podcast](https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2019/08/my-joe-rogan-experience/594802/). For the past several months, much was made about the Trump campaign’s podcast strategy, [reportedly](https://www.thetimes.com/world/us-world/article/barron-trump-son-donald-trump-election-campaign-podcasts-5gkz205l8) masterminded by Trump’s son Barron, which included interviews with the tech-world whisperers Lex Fridman and the _All-In_ _Podcast_. Trump took advantage of every opportunity to be interviewed at length and in casual conversation for huge audiences of young men; Harris did not, and immediately after her loss, this stood out to many people as a big problem. As [_New York Times_ editor Willy Staley](https://x.com/willystaley/status/1854595499279495181) put it in a wry (or grim) post on X, there is now palpable “soul-searching among Democrats about the podcast situation.” I spent Election Night watching a livestream hosted by _The Free Press_, the media company founded by the former _New York Times_ writer Bari Weiss. The guest list was a strange assemblage of iconoclasts and establishment castoffs, and it was obvious from the comments that many viewers were just there to watch It Girls Dasha Nekrasova and Anna Khachiyan, hosts of the [cultish podcast](https://www.thecut.com/2018/10/profile-red-scare-podcast.html) _Red Scare_, smirk and sip teensy glasses of champagne while barely saying anything. (One of Nekrasova’s longer sentences of the night was “He’s winning like crazy, right?”) [Read: Bad news](https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2024/11/you-are-the-media-now/680602/) A little after 8 p.m., the [former presidential candidate Andrew Yang](https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/08/andrew-yang-forward-party/671254/) called in from a parking lot in Philadelphia. “I gotta say, the vibe’s kind of Trumpy,” he told Weiss. He had voted for Kamala Harris, he told her, though he hadn’t been excited about it. He offered his critique of the campaign run by Harris and Tim Walz, which he felt was overly risk-averse and uncharismatic. Specifically, he called out the missed opportunity to appear on _The Joe Rogan Experience_, as both [Trump](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/25/us/politics/trump-joe-rogan-podcast.html) and [J. D. Vance](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/vance-joe-rogan-interview-trump-normal-gay-guy-vote-rcna178135) had done. (Harris purportedly could have appeared on the show if she followed the host’s terms; in late October, Rogan [wrote on X](https://x.com/joerogan/status/1851118464447971595) that, contrary to the campaign’s desires, he would not accept a one-hour time limit on the interview and that he wanted to record in his studio in Austin.) “It pisses me off,” Yang said. “That was a gimme,” he went on. “The Rogan interview would have been almost entirely upside. It’s low-propensity male voters, people that are not inclined to vote for you, so you have nothing to lose.” On Carlson’s [Election Night livestream](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2024-11-07/the-podcasters-who-reported-celebrated-election-night-at-mar-a-lago?utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&utm_term=241107&utm_campaign=soundbite), Elon Musk made a similar argument, alluding to the parasocial, possibly persuasive power of podcasts: “To a reasonable-minded, smart person who’s not hardcore one way or the other, they just listen to someone talk for a few hours, and that’s how they decide whether you’re a good person, whether they like you.” As I watched, I felt annoyed. Rogan’s [anti-vaccine](https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2022/02/joe-rogan-covid-vaccine-misinformation/622040/) rhetoric and [anti-trans](https://variety.com/2024/tv/news/joe-rogan-netflix-stand-up-comedy-special-trans-people-covid-vaccines-1236094910/) shtick—[among many other](https://variety.com/2022/digital/news/spotify-removes-joe-rogan-episodes-n-word-1235172972/) bizarre statements, such as [his claim](https://x.com/TheChiefNerd/status/1685485239479468032) that intelligence agencies provoked January 6—should make him radioactive for any politician, let alone a Democrat in 2024. And anyway, “[more podcasts](https://x.com/jpbrammer/status/1854532759877751220)” sounds like a pretty desperate response to such a monumental loss. But these are stupid times. According to [exit polls](https://www.axios.com/2024/11/07/young-men-voters-trump-2024-exit-polls), Harris did do poorly with young men. Yang was clearly correct that she had nothing to lose. As my colleague Spencer Kornhaber [wrote on Thursday](https://www.theatlantic.com/culture/archive/2024/11/right-wing-influencers-trump-rogan/680575/), Harris may have avoided Rogan’s three-plus-hour, formless interview format for fear of messing up, “but given who ended up winning the election, this … seems like an antiquated concern.” Was this _the_ difference? Definitely not. But it was _a_ difference. Next time, I would guess, Rogan and his ilk will not be snubbed; the oddball internet is mainstream enough to seriously court. Obviously, political campaigns always prioritize making their candidates [appear accessible](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/10584609.1986.9962795), [relatable, authentic](https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/fdr-defends-his-dog), and so on. For a useful historical parallel, I looked to 1976—another election in which a key issue was inflation, a key concern was turning out disaffected young voters and restoring faith in American institutions, and a key problem with the Democratic presidential campaign was that many people said they had no idea what it was about. Jimmy Carter, after seeing what an interview in _Playboy_ had done for California Governor Jerry Brown’s polling numbers during the primaries, agreed to sit for his own. The interviewer, Robert Scheer, wrote in the introduction: “For me, the purpose of the questioning was not to get people to vote for or against the man but to push Carter on some of the vagueness he’s wrapped himself in.” But in September 1976, when the magazine published the [12,000-word Q&A](https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-playboy-magazine), it was regarded almost immediately as a disaster. Carter [infuriated Christians](https://apnews.com/article/jimmy-carter-playboy-lust-adultery-45523cf7e2eb38a784fc999974ba9ac7) and gave satirists plenty to lampoon with his description of feeling “lust” and “adultery” in his heart at times. (Many also read parts of the interview as obliquely referring to his Democratic predecessor, Lyndon B. Johnson, as a liar.) Scheer [later said](https://apnews.com/article/jimmy-carter-playboy-lust-adultery-45523cf7e2eb38a784fc999974ba9ac7) that the idea was to use the length and intimacy of the interview to answer the questions of young voters who “wondered if he was this Southern square.” He also thought that the interview had done exactly what the campaign wanted it to, even if it had made them nervous in the process. Voter turnout in 1976 was [abysmal](https://www.census.gov/library/publications/1978/demo/p20-322.html), as expected in the aftermath of Watergate. But, although the interview was regarded by the national media as a major gaffe, apparently many voters didn’t think about it that way. Some were asked about it in polling conducted the same week it was published—of 1,168 respondents, 289 said they hadn’t heard about the interview, while 790 said they had but it hadn’t changed their minds. Carter did lose some small number of voters, at least in the moment—28 respondents said that the interview had caused them to change their vote from Carter to Gerald Ford, while only four said it had caused them to change their vote from Ford to Carter. [Read: Why Democrats are losing the culture war](https://www.theatlantic.com/culture/archive/2024/11/right-wing-influencers-trump-rogan/680575/) In the end, Carter won with a narrow margin in the popular vote and [outperformed](https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/how-groups-voted-1976) Ford with voters ages 22 to 44, while falling short with voters 45 or older as well as with those 18 to 21. Voters recorded their feelings about the _Playboy_ interview again in exit polls. They were asked whether there was anything they disliked about Carter and given eight choices of response, “I didn’t like his _Playboy_ interview" among them. Again, the respondents said that they cared little about it. (They cared more that he was too pro-union.) If you read all the critiques of the Harris campaign being written right now, you could come to the conclusion that she was both too online and not online enough. She misunderstood her youth support by looking too much at [the wrong parts of TikTok](https://puck.news/how-kamala-harris-lost-the-gen-z-vote); she [went on _Call Her Daddy_](https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2024/10/kamala-harris-call-her-daddy-podcast/680181/), a massively popular podcast that [began](https://www.newsweek.com/entertainment/celebrity-news/how-call-her-daddys-alex-cooper-go-barstool-sports-125m-star-1942541) as part of the Barstool Sports extended universe but was, I guess, [the wrong part](https://pagesix.com/2024/11/06/celebrity-news/dave-portnoy-blames-kamala-harris-loss-on-dems-arrogance-and-moral-superiority/). She won the endorsement of the two [most popular musicians](https://swifties4kamala.com/) in the world, [whose fans](https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/music/2024/10/30/beyonce-kamala-harris-beyhive-call-election/75940067007/) wield a ton of online “power,” however you define it. The default political and cultural stance on the Girl Internet [is liberal to leftist](https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2022/02/tumblr-internet-legacy-survival/621419/) and was pro-Harris, so maybe she spent too much time there and not enough in unfriendly corners. There’s [a more compelling case](https://www.wired.com/story/donald-trump-manosphere-won/) this time around that online misogyny had something to do with the results than there was after Trump’s first victory, in 2016, when reporters were so quick to explain how young men were radicalized [in spaces like 4chan](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2016/11/09/we-actually-elected-a-meme-as-president-how-4chan-celebrated-trumps-victory/)—a website that was always fairly niche, even if it did [influence](https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/09/its-not-easy-being-green/499892/) broader internet culture in certain ways. Today, discontented men are among the most popular influencers on major platforms. The next Democratic candidate will surely sit for Rogan wherever he asks them to sit. They won’t have a choice. They’ll have to take the risk and act like they have nothing to lose—right now, that’s certainly the truth.
2024-12-16
  • The Duke of York is to stay away from the royal family’s traditional Christmas gathering at Sandringham this year amid the controversy surrounding his links to an alleged Chinese spy. Andrew, 64, will miss the festivities at the private Norfolk estate of his brother, King Charles, where 45 members of their family had been expected to spend Christmas Day. Last week, a high court hearing revealed that the [alleged Chinese spy Yang Tengbo](https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/dec/16/alleged-chinese-spy-linked-to-prince-andrew-named-as-yang-tengbo), who was banned from the UK, was said to have been a “close” confidant of Andrew. Yang, a businessman whose identity was previously protected by an anonymity order, was named after a judge lifted the ban on Monday. [ How did Yang Tengbo become close confidant of Prince Andrew? ](https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/dec/16/how-did-yang-tengbo-become-close-confidant-of-prince-andrew) In a statement, Yang denied suggestions he was involved in espionage and said he had “done nothing wrong or unlawful and the concerns raised by the Home Office against me are ill-founded”. The businessman had visited the UK regularly, attending events at a series of royal residences, including Andrew’s birthday party at his home. According to court documents, Yang was so close to the duke that he was authorised to act on his behalf in an international financial initiative with potential partners and investors in China. Andrew’s office said last week he had stopped all contact with the man, whom he had met through “official channels” with “nothing of a sensitive nature ever discussed”. The prince’s ex-wife, Sarah, Duchess of York, will also miss Christmas at Sandringham, in what will be seen as a show of solidarity for her former husband. The pair are said to be preparing to spend the day together at Royal Lodge, the home they share in Windsor Great Park, Berkshire. It is not yet known whether Andrew will attend Charles’s traditional pre-Christmas lunch for the extended family at Buckingham Palace on Thursday. Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie, who have young families, had already planned to spend Christmas with their respective in-laws this year for the first time, sources said.
2024-12-18
  • The Duke of York will not attend the royal family’s traditional pre-Christmas lunch at Buckingham Palace on Thursday amid controversy over his links with an alleged Chinese spy. Prince Andrew is said to have decided to pull out of the occasion after speaking to his ex-wife and close friend, Sarah, Duchess of York. He had already [withdrawn from joining senior royals at Sandringham](https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/dec/16/prince-andrew-to-miss-royal-family-christmas-after-links-to-alleged-chinese-spy-emerge) for the festive period. The Buckingham Palace lunch is a private event for senior royals and their wider family who will not be attending Christmas celebrations at King Charles’s Sandringham home. It was alleged at a high court hearing last week that the [businessman Yang Tengbo,](https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/dec/17/the-rise-of-yang-tengbo-what-were-his-uk-businesses) who has been banned from entering the UK, was said to have been a close confidant of Andrew. Yang has insisted it is “entirely untrue” to claim he was involved in espionage and that he has “done nothing wrong or unlawful”. The businessman was the founder-partner of the Chinese arm of the duke’s Pitch@Palace initiative, and visited Buckingham Palace twice in 2018 to meet him. He is also said to have entered St James’s Palace and Windsor Castle at Andrew’s invitation. Andrew ceased all contact with Yang when concerns were first raised about him, according to a statement from his office last week. It said the prince met Yang through official channels with “nothing of a sensitive nature ever discussed”. Andrew and the Duchess of York were reportedly on the guest list for Thursday’s lunch for about 70 members of the extended royal family, which is seen as a family rather than official occasion. [skip past newsletter promotion](https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/dec/18/prince-andrew-to-miss-royal-familys-traditional-pre-christmas-lunch#EmailSignup-skip-link-7) Sign up to First Edition Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what’s happening and why it matters **Privacy Notice:** Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our [Privacy Policy](https://www.theguardian.com/help/privacy-policy). We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google [Privacy Policy](https://policies.google.com/privacy) and [Terms of Service](https://policies.google.com/terms) apply. after newsletter promotion Sources told the Daily Mail that Buckingham Palace was unsure if the couple would attend until Wednesday. Senior royal aides are said to have been optimistically operating on the working assumption the duke would “see sense” and decide to “keep his head down”.
2024-12-21
  • Princess Beatrice will be joining the royal family at Sandringham this Christmas after changing her travel plans due to medical advice, it is understood. Beatrice and her husband, Edoardo Mapelli Mozzi, are expecting their second child in early spring and were planning on spending the festive period overseas with his parents. But Beatrice, 36, has been advised not to travel long distances, the PA news agency reported. The royal baby will be a little brother or sister for the couple’s three-year-old daughter, Sienna, and Mapelli Mozzi’s son and Beatrice’s stepson, eight-year-old Wolfie. A large number of the royal family will be guests of King Charles and Queen Camilla at Sandringham on Christmas Day. The Prince of Wales revealed recently that 45 people will be “all in one room” at the private Norfolk estate. However, Beatrice’s father, the Duke of York, is staying away amid the controversy surrounding [his links to an alleged Chinese spy](https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/dec/16/prince-andrew-to-miss-royal-family-christmas-after-links-to-alleged-chinese-spy-emerge). Last week, a high court hearing revealed that the [alleged spy, Yang Tengbo](https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/dec/16/alleged-chinese-spy-linked-to-prince-andrew-named-as-yang-tengbo), who was banned from the UK, was said to have been a “close” confidant of Prince Andrew. Yang, a businessman whose identity was previously protected by an anonymity order, was named after a judge lifted the ban on Monday. In a statement, Yang denied suggestions he was involved in espionage and said he had “done nothing wrong or unlawful and the concerns raised by the Home Office against me are ill-founded”. [skip past newsletter promotion](https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/dec/21/princess-beatrice-to-spend-christmas-with-royal-family-due-to-pregnancy#EmailSignup-skip-link-10) Sign up to First Edition Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what’s happening and why it matters **Privacy Notice:** Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our [Privacy Policy](https://www.theguardian.com/help/privacy-policy). We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google [Privacy Policy](https://policies.google.com/privacy) and [Terms of Service](https://policies.google.com/terms) apply. after newsletter promotion Last week, Andrew’s office said he had stopped all contact with the man, whom he had met through “official channels” and with whom “nothing of a sensitive nature ever discussed”. The prince’s ex-wife, Sarah, Duchess of York, will also miss Christmas at Sandringham, in what will be considered as a show of solidarity for her former husband. The pair are said to be preparing to spend the day together at Royal Lodge, the home they share in Windsor Great Park, Berkshire. Beatrice’s sister, Princess Eugenie, and her family are planning on spending Christmas with her in-laws.
2025-01-09
  • Rachel Reeves will fly with a delegation of City grandees to China this week as Labour seeks closer economic links with Beijing as part of its quest for growth. With the [outlook increasingly rocky at home](https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/jan/07/uk-long-term-borrowing-costs-at-highest-since-1998-amid-fears-over-weak-growth) after a run of soft economic data, the chancellor is sorely in need of a positive story to tell. She appears determined to normalise the UK’s relationship with the communist superpower, despite mounting security concerns and a backdrop of growing geopolitical tension. In the past few weeks alone, the UK [has expelled an alleged Chinese spy](https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/dec/16/alleged-chinese-spy-linked-to-prince-andrew-named-as-yang-tengbo) and friend of Prince Andrew, Yang Tengbo, while the US Treasury has accused Beijing of [hacking into staff computers](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/dec/30/china-treasury-cyberattack). Meanwhile, a lawyer for Shein – the online retailer founded in China and which is [lobbying over a potential £50bn London float](https://www.theguardian.com/business/article/2024/jun/03/shein-fashion-group-london-listing-ipo) – was [accused of “wilful ignorance”](https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/jan/07/shein-lawyer-accused-of-wilful-ignorance-over-cotton-linked-to-forced-uyghur-labour) over its supply chain practices by British MPs. At the same time, Beijing is expected to be at the sharp end of Donald Trump’s aggressive trade policy, which could result in tariffs of up to 60% being slapped on all Chinese goods. Policymakers are already contending with a [rapidly declining yuan](https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2025/jan/08/bond-market-selloff-government-borrowing-costs-yields-china-currency-falls-us-jobs-business-live?filterKeyEvents=false&page=with%3Ablock-677e28238f0821528891029f#block-677e28238f0821528891029f) and a stock market selloff. Notwithstanding this inauspicious backdrop – and Beijing’s deeply problematic human rights record – Labour is making a concerted effort to build bridges with [China](https://www.theguardian.com/world/china). The foreign secretary, David Lammy, visited the country in October, and Keir [Starmer had a face-to-face meeting with the Chinese president](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/nov/18/keir-starmer-discusses-human-rights-concerns-with-xi-jinping-at-g20), Xi Jinping, on the sidelines of November’s G20 summit in Rio de Janeiro. In its manifesto, Labour promised to reverse what it called “14 years of damaging Conservative inconsistency over China”, with a new approach: “We will cooperate where we can, compete where we need to, and challenge where we must.” Speaking last month, Reeves said she sought a “pragmatic” relationship with China, which is the UK’s fifth-largest trading partner, [worth £32bn in exports](https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6762c99bcdb5e64b69e30769/china-trade-and-investment-factsheet-2024-12-20.pdf) last year. She acknowledged security concerns, but insisted “we should trade and seek investment when it is in our national interest to do so”. City businesses have urged Reeves to help ensure China is not placed on the higher, more stringent, tier of a new “foreign influence registration scheme” – a decision ultimately to be made by the Home Office. Lobbyists for overseas governments will have to declare their role under this new regime, but the “enhanced” tier will force companies carrying out any activity on behalf of another state to make themselves known – something business groups fear could prevent closer ties. The chancellor will take the Bank of England governor, Andrew Bailey, with her on the visit to Beijing and Shanghai, as well as the FCA chief executive, Nikhil Rathi, and a string of senior banking figures, including HSBC’s chair, Mark Tucker. Reeves will meet China’s vice-premier, He Lifeng, in Beijing before flying to Shanghai for discussions with UK firms operating in China. Enhanced cooperation on financial services is at the heart of the Treasury’s hopes for the trip. Reeves lavished praise on the sector in her Mansion House speech last year, calling it [the “crown jewel” of the UK economy](https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/nov/14/rules-imposed-after-financial-crisis-have-gone-too-far-reeves-tells-city-bankers). The economist Gerard Lyons, who is on the board of the state-owned Bank of China, says: “From the Chinese perspective, they’re moving up the value curve in terms of the economy and the UK, given its expertise in services and financial services, would be able to provide some assistance there. “And naturally, from the UK perspective, we want to see more inward investment from China and more trade with China – so it suits both sides.” Reeves has been clear that the UK hopes to fly the flag for “free and open trade” in the face of Trump’s “America first” protectionism. [skip past newsletter promotion](https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/jan/09/rachel-reeves-heads-to-china-to-build-bridges-but-a-new-golden-era-of-relations-is-impossible#EmailSignup-skip-link-18) Sign up to Business Today Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning **Privacy Notice:** Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our [Privacy Policy](https://www.theguardian.com/help/privacy-policy). We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google [Privacy Policy](https://policies.google.com/privacy) and [Terms of Service](https://policies.google.com/terms) apply. after newsletter promotion The chancellor’s trip is expected to mark the resumption of the UK-China Economic and Financial Dialogue (EFD), a formal arrangement between the two countries. This structure of regular meetings was introduced under Tony Blair’s government, but the last one was held in London in 2019. After that, relations soured as the draconian security law was passed in Hong Kong, prompting Boris Johnson’s government to [open a visa scheme](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/03/britain-could-change-immigration-rules-for-hong-kong-citizens) for British passport holders in the territory that has since brought more than 150,000 people to the UK. Over recent years, China and the US have been locked in an increasingly fractious battle for economic supremacy, and hopes have long faded that Beijing’s induction into the global trading system a quarter of a century ago would lead it in a more liberal direction. While Trump’s anti-China rhetoric has been vehement, Joe Biden retained the swingeing tariffs imposed in Trump’s first term. Biden has also used export restrictions to try to restrict China’s access to key technologies, on security grounds. Neil Shearing, chief economist at consultancy Capital [Economics](https://www.theguardian.com/business/economics), who is writing a book about the US-China clash and its influence on the rest of the world, says the UK is unlikely to be able to resist taking sides, whatever Reeves’s intentions. “Given the UK is trying to find a place for itself in the world post-Brexit, trying to build some bridges is not necessarily a bad idea,” he says. But, he adds: “This post-Covid era is about the geopolitical rivalry between the US and China – they are the pre-eminent global superpowers, and increasingly other countries will be forced to pick a side. And in that instance it’s pretty clear which way the UK will break, Trump or no Trump: they’re going to break for the US. We saw this with [Huawei](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/huawei).” Huawei, the Chinese telecoms operator, [was banned from the UK’s 5G network in 2020](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/nov/30/huawei-uk-bans-new-5g-network-equipment-from-september) by Johnson. The UK government had initially sought to take a different line from the Trump administration, but eventually caved in to intense US pressure. Shearing says: “Countries don’t get to decide where they align: the US and China get to decide the contours of this fracturing.” Because of this darker geopolitical backdrop, there will be no resumption of the [“golden era” for UK-China relations](https://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/sep/20/osborne-china-visit-beijing-best-partner) touted by George Osborne in 2015 – the same year that, improbably, saw President Xi [sipping a pint of IPA in David Cameron’s local pub](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/oct/22/david-cameron-xi-jinping-village-pub-drink-pint) during a state visit. But with GDP at home stagnating, Reeves clearly hopes to underline the distance she is willing to go to seek out willing business partners for the UK.
2025-03-08
  • Abraham Rios, a 76-year-old army veteran and retiree, regularly meets friends at a coffee shop around the corner from his home in Brooklyn, and that is about all he does, he says. The Puerto Rico native who served in the Vietnam war is satisfied with the money he gets from social security and enjoys life, but he would like to see more police in his Clinton Hill neighborhood, where he has lived since 1964. Rios thinks [Andrew Cuomo](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/andrew-cuomo), who on 1 March entered the New York City mayoral race in an attempt to resurrect a seemingly dead political career, can make that happen. “He is a very good leader,” Rios said of Cuomo, who resigned as [New York](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/new-york) governor in 2021 after facing sexual harassment allegations, which he denied. “He made his mistakes, like all of us have,” but “the governor built bridges. He helped the poor. He helped everybody.” Cuomo’s long history in New York politics and name recognition has helped him storm to a lead in a candidate field featuring an incumbent – [Eric Adams](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/eric-adams) – whom many see as corrupt, and a large number of lesser-known candidates who are struggling to get much traction. The scandal that brought Cuomo down and his controversial handling of the Covid-19 pandemic probably won’t have a significant impact on his chances of winning, New York political analysts say, but some voters don’t like what they viewed as his heavy-handed approach as governor and don’t think he is progressive enough. “The judging of the mayor is going to be determined not on incidents in their past but who we feel has got the best chance of leading the city when things that are not predictable happen,” like the pandemic and the September 11 terrorist attacks, said Mitchell Moss, New York University professor of urban policy and planning. “He is the only candidate” with experience “at the federal level, the state level and who understands how to make the tough decisions”. The Democratic mayoral primary, which will probably determine who wins the general election in the blue city, is scheduled for 24 June. The city will again use a [ranked-choice system](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/oct/26/new-york-city-ranked-choice-voting-how-it-works) in which voters pick their preferred candidates from one to five, though they do not need to select more than one. If someone captures more than half the votes, they win; if not, the candidate with the fewest first-round votes is eliminated, and their supporters’ votes go to their second choice. That process continues until one candidate has a majority of the votes. Cuomo, who for months was rumored to be considering running, had a wide lead in [February](https://www.honanstrategy.com/blog/the-rotten-apple-new-poll-shows-75-of-dems-say-nyc-in-crisis-with-nearly-half-ready-to-leave-if-things-get-worse/) [polls](https://emersoncollegepolling.com/new-york-city-mayoral-poll-cuomo-leads-primary-adams-faces-low-support-amid-high-unfavorability/), with about a third of voters in two surveys saying he was their favorite candidate among nine Democrats, while the runner-up in each only received 10%. Other candidates include Adams, who faced a federal indictment until the US justice department dropped the charges against him, it appears, in exchange for his help implementing Donald Trump’s immigration policy; the current and former city comptrollers, Brad Lander and Scott Stringer; the New York state assembly member Zohran Mamdani; and the state senator Jessica Ramos, among others. In announcing his candidacy, Cuomo said the city was in crisis. “You feel it when you walk down the street and try not to make eye contact with a mentally ill homeless person or when the anxiety rises up in your chest as you’re walking down into the subway,” Cuomo said in [a video](https://x.com/andrewcuomo/status/1895891752864924012). “These conditions exist not as an act of God, but rather as an act of our political leaders, or, more precisely, the lack of intelligent action by many of our political leaders.” ![Demonstrators, including Lindsey Boylan, second from right, a former aide to former Governor Andrew Cuomo, who accused him of an unwanted kiss, stand outside a fundraiser in New York, on Tuesday.](https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/804f5f20450de374182f1acb5f071f17e7b09c7e/0_0_5760_3840/master/5760.jpg?width=445&dpr=1&s=none&crop=none)[](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/mar/08/andrew-cuomo-new-york-mayor-election#img-2) Demonstrators, including Lindsey Boylan, second from right, a former aide who accused Andrew Cuomo of an unwanted kiss, stand outside a fundraiser on Tuesday. Photograph: Richard Drew/AP As governor, Cuomo allegedly [bullied](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/mar/07/gretchen-whitmer-andrew-cuomo-sexual-harassment-allegations) those who disagreed with him. While that made it hard for him to [find allies](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/cuomo-fall-sexual-harassment/2021/08/10/69094b8a-f9fd-11eb-b8dd-0e376fba55f2_story.html) when he faced calls to resign, it also contributed to the perception that he is a strong leader, said Doug Muzzio, a retired political science professor who worked at Baruch College. Meanwhile, “the incumbent is seen to be a weak person who is in the pocket of a president who the voters despise”, Muzzio said. Cuomo can also point to his infrastructure accomplishments, Moss said, which include rebuilding a bridge that connects [Brooklyn and Queens](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/29/nyregion/kosciuszko-bridge-span-new-york.html), an overhaul of [La Guardia airport](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2015/jul/27/cuomo-and-biden-unveil-plan-for-new-laguardia-airport-new-york-video?CMP=gu_com) and construction of the [Moynihan Train Hall](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/11/arts/design/moynihan-train-hall-review.html). Kim Grover, a graphic designer who lives in the East Village, said she was concerned about the allegations that Cuomo [sexually harassed](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/aug/10/andrew-cuomo-resigns-sexual-harassment-intimidation) 11 women and that his [administration underreported](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/feb/12/andrew-cuomo-new-york-nursing-home-covid-deaths-leaked-recording) how many people died in nursing homes during the pandemic. Still, Grover thinks Cuomo [stood up](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2020/oct/07/be-afraid-of-covid-new-york-governor-cuomo-blasts-trump-over-coronavirus-denial-video) to Trump during the pandemic – and in doing so, to many, [became a hero](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/aug/10/andrew-cuomo-resigns-covid-hero-fall-from-grace). She now worries about maintaining New Yorkers’ civil rights and [sanctuary city](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/mar/05/mayors-sanctuary-city-immigration) policy, which keeps local law enforcement from cooperating with federal immigration officers, something Trump and [Republicans have attacked](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/mar/05/mayors-sanctuary-city-immigration). “In terms of his excellent delivery and communication skills, my first thought would be that \[Cuomo\] would be a good person to stand his ground against President Trump,” said Grover, 67, who has not decided whom she will support. Gabe Russell, a petitioner for a Democrat in the comptroller race – whom he declined to name – did not like Cuomo even before the Covid and sexual harassment scandals, and Cuomo is not on his list of five candidates. His top two choices are Mamdani and Lander. Cuomo “was [very cozy](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/27/nyregion/cuomo-fundraiser-donors-lobbyists.html) with the real estate lobby … and that is always a bad sign”, said Russell, 33, who wants the government to use [mathematics](https://www.colorado.edu/today/2021/09/30/can-math-make-redistricting-more-fair) to prevent gerrymandering. “New York is one of the bluest states. We should have been doing far more lefty stuff than we ever do.” Russell also thinks Cuomo could lose support, citing the 2021 mayoral election, when [Andrew Yang](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jun/23/andrew-yang-new-york-mayoral-race-eric-adams) was the frontrunner and then fell to fourth place. Elena Siyanko, a longtime leader of arts organizations who moved to New York in 1996, said the city was once a “generative place in terms of culture, where artists could afford to live” but had become a place “for hi-tech and financial services”. An East Village resident, Siyanko blames Cuomo for the safety issues he now decries because of how he cut funding for social services. For example, to address a budget shortfall, he discontinued $65m in annual payments for a [rental assistance program](https://www.politico.com/news/2025/03/04/andrew-cuomo-fix-new-york-00209892), while also [refusing to raise taxes](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/07/nyregion/wealth-tax-budget-billionaires.html) on the state’s wealthiest residents. “He is in this neoliberal camp of removing any safety net and economic support from public life,” said Siyanko, 53, who immigrated from Kyiv, Ukraine, and is undecided in the mayoral race. “We just need to try to get to a corruption-free candidate in this chapter of our life in New York City.”
2025-05-10
  • It was a shocking scandal involving the betrayal of one of the most sacred bonds in medicine, as one of [New York](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/new-york)’s top doctors abused hundreds of women under his care. Now, after a fresh settlement agreement last week from [Columbia University](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/columbia-university) and NewYork-Presbyterian hospital, the compensation for the crimes of Robert Hadden has approached almost a billion dollars and raised further questions as to how he was able to carry out his crimes for so long. The latest $750m deal covered [sexual assaults](https://www.theguardian.com/society/rape) by the gynecologist for more than two decades at New York hospitals. His victims had [already received more than $200m](https://www.cuimc.columbia.edu/news/columbia-university-and-newyork-presbyterian-reach-164-million-agreement-146-past-patients-former-gynecologist-robert-hadden) from his former employers, who were accused of knowing about his behavior and allowing him to continue practicing medicine. “It’s a clear message that we’re going to hold institutions accountable,” Laurie Maldonado, who spent about 10 years as one of Hadden’s patients and was sexually assaulted by him, said of the settlement. “Don’t protect a serial predator; protect your patients.” In 2023, Hadden [was convicted](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jul/25/robert-hadden-gynecologist-sentenced-sexual-abuse) and sentenced to 20 years in prison for luring patients to travel across state lines so that he could sexually abuse them. From 1987 until 2012, Hadden sexually assaulted and abused female patients during appointments and deliveries at Columbia University Irving medical center and NewYork-Presbyterian hospital, according to federal prosecutors. His victims even included some of New York City’s most prominent women, including [Evelyn Yang](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/16/us/andrew-evelyn-yang-dr-robert-hadden.html), wife of former presidential candidate and New York mayoral hopeful Andrew Yang. Hadden conducted an emergency delivery for Eva Santos Veloz in 2008 and checked her without gloves, using significant force and almost his entire fist, she said. “It was a really traumatic experience,” said Santos Veloz, who was then 18 years old and scared to disclose the sexual assault because of her immigration status. Maldonado, who teaches and studies single-parent families and policy, said she saw Hadden from 2003 until 2012, during which time he engaged in grooming behavior by finding ways to get her to undress and asking inappropriate questions about her sex life. “He really used his knowledge to make it seem like he was the only doctor for you,” said Maldonado, who had a miscarriage. In 2011, two days before she gave birth to her son, Hadden did a dilation check during which he examined her cervix with enough force to make her cry out in pain. “It’s supposed to be the happiest, joyful time of being a mother, and you feel like that moment was taken away from you,” Maldonado said. “I feel like the harm and the trauma is still in my body.” In 2012, New York police arrested Hadden after receiving a call from a patient who said he licked her during an exam. Despite that allegation, a Columbia administrator allowed him to continue practicing medicine as long as he had a chaperone with him while examining patients and complied with university and hospital policies, [ProPublica reported](https://www.propublica.org/article/columbia-obgyn-sexually-assaulted-patients-for-20-years). He continued to sexually assault patients for five weeks before Columbia suspended him, and he later retired. In 2013, the university informed Hadden’s patients that he had closed his practice but did not provide a reason, [according to a letter](https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23944954-dear-valued-patient-letter-april-2013/) in the ProPublica report. In 2016, prosecutors [agreed to a deal](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/sep/09/new-york-gynecologist-robert-hadden-federal-charges) in which Hadden would plead guilty to a felony and misdemeanor, register as a sex offender and surrender his medical license but not serve time in prison. After more women abused by Hadden [came forward](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jan/16/evelyn-yang-andrew-wife-sexual-assault-pregnant) in 2020, federal prosecutors [filed new charges](https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/former-obstetriciangynecologist-robert-hadden-charged-manhattan-federal-court-sexually), which resulted in the conviction and 20-year-prison sentence. Columbia University [did not apologize](https://www.propublica.org/article/columbia-obgyn-abuse-university-students-response) until ProPublica published its report in 2023, according to the news organization. Before the settlement this week, the hospitals [agreed to pay](https://www.cuimc.columbia.edu/news/hadden-agreement) $71m to 79 patients in 2021 and [$165m](https://www.cuimc.columbia.edu/news/columbia-university-and-newyork-presbyterian-reach-164-million-agreement-146-past-patients-former-gynecologist-robert-hadden) to 147 patients in 2022. The new deal provides $750m to 576 patients. [skip past newsletter promotion](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/may/10/robert-hadden-sexual-assault-columbia-university-gynecologist#EmailSignup-skip-link-18) Sign up to First Thing Our US morning briefing breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what’s happening and why it matters **Privacy Notice:** Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our [Privacy Policy](https://www.theguardian.com/help/privacy-policy). We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google [Privacy Policy](https://policies.google.com/privacy) and [Terms of Service](https://policies.google.com/terms) apply. after newsletter promotion “This has been 13 years in the making, and I’m grateful for all my clients who have come forward to hold not just Hadden accountable, but more importantly, his enablers at [Columbia University](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/columbia-university) and NewYork-Presbyterian hospital,” said Anthony T DiPietro, an attorney for the plaintiffs. A Columbia spokesperson responded to an interview request with a statement that the university was “implementing a multi-pronged plan, including an external investigation, a survivors’ settlement fund” and new “patient safety policies and programs to address the abuses of Robert Hadden”. “We deeply regret the pain that his patients suffered, and this settlement is another step forward in our ongoing work and commitment to repair harm and support survivors. We commend the survivors for their bravery in coming forward,” the statement continued. A NewYork-Presbyterian spokesperson responded to the request by stating that Columbia would be “issuing all statements on this issue”. Santos Veloz, who now has three children, called the most recent huge settlement “a big win”. “No matter how much they wanted to cover it up, we were able to work together to hold \[Columbia\] accountable in some way,” said Santos Veloz, who hopes to become an immigration attorney. Still, Santos Veloz said, she was waiting to see whether Columbia would follow through with its plan to better protect patients. “We could get all the money in the world, but if this continues to happen, it means nothing,” she said. Meanwhile, DiPietro, the plaintiffs’ attorney, now represents hundreds of women in lawsuits against [Dr Barry Brock](https://www.atdlaw.com/lawsuits/barry-brock), a gynecologist at Cedars-Sinai medical center in Los Angeles, [who allegedly sexually abused](https://www.cbsnews.com/losangeles/news/107-women-lawsuit-alleging-sexual-misconduct-former-cedars-sinai-obgyn/) patients, and against NewYork-Presbyterian, Weill Cornell medical center and Northwell Health, which employed Darius Paduch, a urologist sentenced to life in prison for sexually abusing patients, including minors. “The Haddens of the world are not the problem; they are just a symptom,” DiPietro. “The problem is the toxic culture at these medical institutions that lie, cover up and expose more patients to known serial sexual predators.” _Information and support for anyone affected by rape or sexual abuse issues is available from the following organizations. In the US, Rainn offers support on 800-656-4673. In the UK, Rape Crisis offers support on 0808 500 2222. In Australia, support is available at 1800Respect (1800 737 732). Other international helplines can be found at ibiblio.org/rcip/internl.html_
2025-06-06
  • June 5, 2025, 10:40 PM ET The sun rises every morning. Spring turns to summer. Water is wet. Donald Trump and Elon Musk’s [relationship](https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2024/10/donald-trump-elon-musk-butler/680174/) has ended with a tweet about Jeffrey Epstein. This was inevitable. When [Elon Musk](https://www.theatlantic.com/tag/person/elon-musk/) attached himself to [Trump](https://www.theatlantic.com/tag/person/donald-trump/) during Trump’s presidential transition last fall, there was great speculation that these two massive egos would, eventually, clash and that their strategic partnership would flame out spectacularly. Many onlookers assumed that Trump would be the one to tire of Musk and that the centibillionaire would fly too close to the sun, becoming too visible in the administration or simply too annoying. During his short time in government, Musk did manage to anger [some of Trump’s staff and advisers](https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2025/05/elon-musk-doge-opponents-dc/682866/), tank his [public reputation](https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2025/03/cybertruck-washington-dc/682232/) with many American voters, and jeopardize the [financial health](https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2025/04/tesla-earnings-elon-musk-doge/682551/) of his EV company, Tesla. Still, through all of that, Trump remained remarkably on message and supportive. Instead it was Musk who fired the first shots, specifically criticisms of the Republicans’ budget-reconciliation package (a.k.a. the One Big Beautiful Bill Act). On Tuesday, Musk called the bill a “disgusting abomination,” [threatened](https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1929984535456035202) to politically retaliate against its supporters, and argued it would increase the debt. This led to Trump calling out Musk in an Oval Office meeting today with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, and suggesting that the DOGE figurehead had “Trump derangement syndrome.” The [episode that followed](https://www.theatlantic.com/newsletters/archive/2025/06/elon-musk-fighting-x-truth-trump/683045/) has been playing out in reality-TV fashion, with X and Truth Social acting as confessional booths. On X, Musk argued that, “without me, Trump would have lost the election” and accused Trump of “such ingratitude.” On Truth Social, Trump [posted](https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/114632205177163456) that “Elon was ‘wearing thin’” and that, when the president asked Musk to leave, “he just went CRAZY!” It keeps going. At one point in the afternoon, as if sensing the feud had reached a critical mass of attention, Musk leveled a serious allegation against Trump, [posting](https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1930703865801810022): “@realDonaldTrump is in the Epstein files. That is the real reason they have not been made public. Have a nice day, DJT!” Musk had, it seems, kicked off an attentional spectacle without precedent. You have the world’s richest man, who is terminally online and whose brain has been addled by social media and, [reportedly](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/30/us/elon-musk-drugs-children-trump.html), other substances. He is one of the most prolific and erratic high-profile posters, so much so that he purchased his favorite social network to mold it in his image. He is squaring off against Trump, arguably the most consequential, off-the-cuff poster of all time and, one must note, the current president of the United States. If it weren’t for the other, both men would be peerless in their ability to troll, outrage, and command news cycles via their fragile, mercurial egos. The point being: If this public fight between Musk and Trump continues, we will witness a Super Bowl of schadenfreude unfold. It’s guaranteed to entertain and leave those of us who spectate feeling gross. It is, in other words, the logical endpoint of internet beefs. This spectacle is tempting to view as a cage match: Two men enter, one man leaves. (Musk, at least, is [familiar](https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2023/08/musk-zuckerberg-rivalry-newsworthiness/675014/).) But that mentality supposes a winner and a loser, and it’s worth asking what winning even looks like here. Surely, nobody will come out of this unscathed. Musk’s “Epstein files” comment, beyond being an allegation about Trump’s relationship with the convicted sex offender and child trafficker, also is a suggestion that Musk might have other dirt on the Trump administration. And the likely loss of Musk’s donor money deprives Trump of political leverage. Similarly, Trump has [suggested](https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/114632206992330264) he might strip Musk’s companies of their federal funding and subsidies. Tesla’s stock has fallen [sharply](https://www.cnbc.com/2025/06/05/tesla-shares-musk-trump.html) today since Musk began rage-posting against Trump, which suggests there will be real consequences. (Meanwhile, people, including Steve Bannon, are already [musing](https://www.mediaite.com/politics/bannon-says-hes-advising-trump-to-deport-elon-musk-immediately/) that Musk could get himself deported.) Consider, though, that in the realm of social media, Musk and Trump both know exactly what they are doing. Musk and Trump are innately attuned to attention and how to attract and wield it. It stands to reason that their interpretation of their past decade online is that public feuding has, essentially, no downside for them. Instead, their perma-arguing, norm-stomping, and general shamelessness has allowed them to become the main characters of a media and political ecosystem that demands constant fodder. Harnessing attention in this way has proved remarkably lucrative. Many credit Trump’s initial victory in 2016 to his ability to program the news cycle 140 characters at a time. Meanwhile, some [analysts](https://www.theatlantic.com/newsletters/archive/2022/04/twitter-elon-musk-meme-tweet-debates/676857/) have suggested that Musk’s companies are, in their own right, memestocks whose fortunes have risen on the centibillionaire’s incessant ability to stay in the spotlight. Trump’s and Musk’s constant provocations and attention seeking have downstream effects, too. Their feuding creates content for others to draft off of. The press can cover it, influencers can react to it, politicians can fundraise off it, and all manner of online hustlers can find a way to get in. You can already see the attentional cottage industry hard at work in the Musk-Trump fight as lesser attention merchants try to involve themselves. The podcaster Lex Fridman [offered](https://x.com/lexfridman/status/1930717014420807992) to broker peace on his show while the rapper Ye [stepped](https://x.com/kanyewest/status/1930709557879439628) in to comment on the chaos. The onetime presidential candidate and third-party champion Andrew Yang [seized](https://x.com/AndrewYang/status/1930726683360833860) on Musk’s comments to drum up enthusiasm for his pet project. Even the replies became valuable real estate—the long strings of responses to Musk's posts about Trump are littered with advertisements automatically inserted by X. (I saw one for a Trump T-shirt company.) In this way, a Trump-Musk beef is an attentional Big Bang. In 2020, the blogger [Venkatesh Rao](https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2020/01/16/the-internet-of-beefs/) wrote a seminal post titled “The Internet of Beefs,” arguing that the structure of social media and our culture-warring has brought about “a stable, endemic, background societal condition of continuous conflict.” In it, he describes the Internet of Beefs as having “a feudal structure,” with charismatic leaders (knights), and anonymous legions of normies (mooks) who’ve devoted themselves to fight on behalf of these leaders. Rao identifies Trump as an ur-example of a knight, who is able to profit off of all of the discord he’s helped sow. “For the mook, the conflict is a means to an end, however incoherent,” Rao writes. “For the knight, the conflict is the end. Growing it, and keeping it going, is something like an entrepreneurial cultural capital business model.” I reread Rao’s post as the internet worked itself into a lather over today’s fight. Many of the dynamics Rao explained were on display: sycophants lining up to defend Musk or Trump in the hope of getting noticed, various posters (myself included) excitedly or dutifully chronicling the fallout—there is seemingly opportunity everywhere, created by this attentional spectacle. The [content](https://x.com/JoeyMannarinoUS/status/1930672338514681902) is at [once](https://bsky.app/profile/kimberleyjohnson.bsky.social/post/3lqve647zkc2e) [depressing](https://x.com/LauraLoomer/status/1930733214672515552) and [tremendous](https://bsky.app/profile/ericcolumbus.bsky.social/post/3lqv7lp3ark2a). At a glance, it looks like everyone’s winning. Of course, nobody is. Rao’s most salient point in his essay is that this state of forever beef is a consequence of a societal rot. It’s a stalling tactic of sorts, one that prevents us from deciding who we are, both individually and collectively. If that sounds overwrought, it’s worth remembering the genesis of Musk and Trump’s feud, a funding bill in Congress that would result in roughly [$1 trillion in cuts](https://www.cnn.com/2025/05/21/politics/medicaid-food-stamps-gop-proposed-cuts) to Medicaid and food stamps, while [offering a similar value](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/23/opinion/ezra-klein-podcast-catherine-rampell.html) in tax cuts to high earners. Millions of people [could](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/05/upshot/obamacare-cuts-republicans.html?searchResultPosition=2) lose their current coverage through Obamacare if the bill passes. These details are vaporized by the size and scale of this particular beef. The Trump-Musk feud is not so much a distraction as it is evidence of a societal tendency toward abstraction, even obfuscation. A cage match is easier to watch than a discussion about who deserves benefits and resources. It is certainly more cathartic than an ideological stalemate about the world we want to build. Maybe Trump or Musk will find a way to win or lose their spat. The rest of us, though, will probably not be so lucky, destined instead to spectate fight after fight.
2025-06-18
  • With a week left until New York’s Democratic mayoral primary, one might have thought that the former governor Andrew Cuomo would be measuring the drapes at Gracie Mansion. Real estate developers, corporations like Doordash, a smattering of billionaires and even Billy Joel [have shoveled cash](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/01/nyregion/cuomo-donors-mayor.html) into his campaign, with his Super Pac spending more money than any other outside force in the city’s political history. This is on top of his entering the race with major name recognition advantage, amounting to a [20- or 30-point lead](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/polls/nyc-mayoral-primary-election-polls-2025.html) as recently as May. But according to a new poll, Zohran Mamdani – the insurgent state assemblyman and democratic socialist whom [the Nation recently co-endorsed](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.thenation.com_article_politics_nation-2Dendorsement-2Dnyc-2Dmayor-2Dzohran-2Dmamdani-2Dbrad-2Dlander_&d=DwMFaQ&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=cfFL3dLPwaOYnncRIaJaVb6yzkWBiQee8cU8wm1TOso&m=KbIsIfQ6Cbs4M7Um7rVRyhou4FqmgqJi2srL1glcdBQ49JDZGCKSoO2yD81CfFbd&s=QNvoQ9lpa0iG12o7tFiw0L3O218kc6fAG2Dzb-i2318&e=) along with fellow mayoral candidate and New York City comptroller Brad Lander – has pulled [ahead](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.politico.com_news_2025_06_11_zohran-2Dmamdani-2Dclimbs-2Dto-2Dtop-2Dof-2Dpoll-2Dleading-2Dandrew-2Dcuomo-2D00401594&d=DwMFaQ&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=cfFL3dLPwaOYnncRIaJaVb6yzkWBiQee8cU8wm1TOso&m=KbIsIfQ6Cbs4M7Um7rVRyhou4FqmgqJi2srL1glcdBQ49JDZGCKSoO2yD81CfFbd&s=--HfzpQb32af1AEBDIxEzXdgRQZId-PcsA3SP3Zq56o&e=) of Cuomo for the first time. And while Mamdani’s campaign deserves credit for offering a clear, inspiring, progressive message, the fact that he is competitive can also be partly credited to [New York](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/new-york) City’s ranked-choice voting (RCV) system. It’s a winning system for candidates who would otherwise be sidelined or would cannibalize each other’s support – and for voters who can finally cast their ballots based on policy rather than pragmatism. America’s politics have long been dominated (or diluted) by [first-past-the-post (FPTP) voting](https://www.commoncause.org/colorado/articles/first-past-the-post-voting-our-elections-explained/?source=adwords&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=22610707604&gbraid=0AAAAADyMmbxYvgKQkNW1aCWcCNsqtR_3W&gclid=Cj0KCQjwmK_CBhCEARIsAMKwcD5f9WockqiPiKpuesUwXnY7ZodFi0KQFrByDznkG_o-h_uWXdf8QocaAkD_EALw_wcB). In it, citizens cast their ballot for one candidate, and whoever receives the most votes wins. Straightforward as it seems, this method forces an either/or choice, often resulting in voters deciding between the lesser of two evils. Not only does this [reinforce a two-party duopoly](https://secondratedemocracy.com/the-two-party-duopoly/) in general elections, but it also incentivizes a binary choice between the two leading candidates in primaries. For the candidates themselves, the system encourages scorched-earth campaigns that divide parties and inflame the narcissism of small differences. The progressive senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren came into the 2020 Democratic presidential primary as allies with much more in common ideologically than their centrist opponents. But there was no electoral incentive for either of them to form an alliance with the other. Instead, they fought to consolidate a minority faction within the party, and got mired in a [grisly](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.cnn.com_2020_01_13_politics_bernie-2Dsanders-2Delizabeth-2Dwarren-2Dmeeting&d=DwMFaQ&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=cfFL3dLPwaOYnncRIaJaVb6yzkWBiQee8cU8wm1TOso&m=KbIsIfQ6Cbs4M7Um7rVRyhou4FqmgqJi2srL1glcdBQ49JDZGCKSoO2yD81CfFbd&s=t_CT5ejLgObQ7U_bFxJhBjcfHTVnq3oI3lANJLLG76M&e=) and [public](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__thehill.com_homenews_campaign_477868-2Dsanders-2Dcampaign-2Dtelling-2Dvolunteers-2Dto-2Dtell-2Dwarren-2Dsupporters-2Dshe-2Donly_&d=DwMFaQ&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=cfFL3dLPwaOYnncRIaJaVb6yzkWBiQee8cU8wm1TOso&m=KbIsIfQ6Cbs4M7Um7rVRyhou4FqmgqJi2srL1glcdBQ49JDZGCKSoO2yD81CfFbd&s=3PpmlGy3MzH2nNwjMmC64pRlYx4N60tfKPffofhJmrc&e=) feud. The mudslinging did leave one person standing – Joe Biden. In contrast, RCV makes it possible for dark horse candidates to work together. After Mamdani’s campaign reached the fundraising limit, he [urged his supporters](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gothamist.com_news_to-2Ddefeat-2Dandrew-2Dcuomo-2Dzohran-2Dmamdani-2Durges-2Dsupporters-2Dto-2Ddonate-2Dto-2Dadrienne-2Dadams&d=DwMFaQ&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=cfFL3dLPwaOYnncRIaJaVb6yzkWBiQee8cU8wm1TOso&m=KbIsIfQ6Cbs4M7Um7rVRyhou4FqmgqJi2srL1glcdBQ49JDZGCKSoO2yD81CfFbd&s=v6DvbcERwrv3DuaXiww2462_wyU30Nj9owJy-PBqBWw&e=) to donate to a fellow anti-Cuomo candidate, Adrienne Adams. Adams, in turn, has maintained a focus on criticizing Cuomo, even deleting a [tweet](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.nydailynews.com_2025_06_11_adrienne-2Dadams-2Ddeletes-2Dpost-2Dcritical-2Dof-2Dzohran-2Dmamdani-2Dbut-2Ddeclares-2Dno-2Dregrets_&d=DwMFaQ&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=cfFL3dLPwaOYnncRIaJaVb6yzkWBiQee8cU8wm1TOso&m=KbIsIfQ6Cbs4M7Um7rVRyhou4FqmgqJi2srL1glcdBQ49JDZGCKSoO2yD81CfFbd&s=nOE-r16pe2MX_UdYTV-NkSgCJ7W6-VCO0MggfYjddcw&e=) that was perceived as a swipe at Mamdani. These contenders are making it clear they truly believe – as the Nation’s editorial board wrote in our endorsement – New Yorkers deserve better than Andrew Cuomo. Critics of ranked-choice voting argue it’s too confusing, but successful implementations of the system in other jurisdictions suggest otherwise. In Alaska’s 2022 congressional special election, the first statewide RCV election there, [85% of people](https://www.alaskansforbetterelections.com/polling-shows-alaskan-voters-understand-ranked-choice-voting/) who cast their ballots said they found the method to be simple. It also enabled the Democrat Mary Peltola to fend off an extremist challenge from Sarah Palin. Maine has also seen promising results from RCV, with [60% of its voters](https://fairvote.org/press/maine_voters_want_to_keep_rcv/) favoring the system. Cities like Minneapolis and Cambridge, Massachusetts, have [enjoyed higher turnout](https://fairvote.org/the_facts_of_ranked_choice_voting_voters_like_it_high_turnouts_are_trending/) after the implementation of RCV. But RCV is only as effective as its participants make it. Ahead of New York City’s mayoral primary in 2021, I wrote [a column](https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/05/04/ranked-choice-voting-is-already-changing-politics-better/) expressing high hopes for how the debut of RCV could reshape the city’s politics. But that race became chaotic for other reasons. Scott Stringer and Dianne Morales’s campaigns [collapsed](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.cityandstateny.com_politics_2024_09_four-2Dcandidates-2Drace-2Dand-2Dcounting-2Dprogressives-2Dlook-2Dranked-2Dchoice-2Ddefeat-2Deric-2Dadams_399521_&d=DwMFaQ&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=cfFL3dLPwaOYnncRIaJaVb6yzkWBiQee8cU8wm1TOso&m=KbIsIfQ6Cbs4M7Um7rVRyhou4FqmgqJi2srL1glcdBQ49JDZGCKSoO2yD81CfFbd&s=3lbm6--HZ-aCF8WFoIYInh1zSZN30mpj5Hl9h3xQSjo&e=). Advocacy groups had to un-endorse and re-endorse – in some cases, multiple times. There was a progressive effort to coalesce around Maya Wiley, including a belated [endorsement](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/05/nyregion/aoc-maya-wiley-endorsement-nyc-mayor.html) from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Meanwhile, pragmatists who felt Eric Adams and Andrew Yang lacked substance turned to the sanitation commissioner, Kathryn Garcia. If Wiley and Garcia had cross-endorsed, one of them might have defeated Adams. Instead, Adams won the primary in the final round by [just over 7,000 votes](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/06/22/us/elections/results-nyc-mayor-primary.html). This time, the mayoral candidates seem to have learned. On Friday, Mamdani and Lander [cross-endorsed each other](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/13/nyregion/mamdani-lander-endorsement-nyc-mayor.html), encouraging their supporters to rank the other second. Mamdani explained the decision with a refreshing mix of idealism and realism: “This is the necessary step to ensure that we’re not just serving our own campaigns – we’re serving the city at large.” This was followed by [another cross-endorsement](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/16/nyregion/mamdani-blake-nyc-mayors-race.html), between Mamdani and former assemblyman Michael Blake, on Monday. And the national progressive movement is much more united than it was in 2021, with both [Ocasio-Cortez and Sanders](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/17/nyregion/bernie-sanders-endorse-mamdani-mayor.html) endorsing Mamdani in the home stretch this time. By treating each other like allies rather than adversaries, the anti-Cuomo coalition might just prevail. If anything, it is the establishment wing of the New York Democratic party that is struggling to coalesce – as evinced by the New York Times’ [non-endorsement endorsement](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/16/opinion/new-york-mayor-election-advice.html) that, if you squint, could be perceived as encouraging New Yorkers to support Cuomo, Lander, hedge fund manager Whitney Tilson, or flee the city. The Nation has a long history of covering New York’s mayoral races. Although no New York mayor has been elected to higher office [since 1869](https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna22927885) – just four years after the magazine was founded – the office has long held fascinating implications for American progressivism. Fiorello La Guardia, whom Mamdani and Lander have both named as the [greatest mayor](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/10/nyregion/zohran-mamdani-interview.html) in the city’s history, took office at the height of the Great Depression and led the city through the second world war. Over 12 years of cascading crises, he transformed the city with a bold vision characterized by expanding public housing and public spaces, curbing corruption, and unflinchingly supporting the reforms of the New Deal. Now, nearly a century later, New Yorkers have an opportunity to bring the city into a new era once again. And ordinarily, making that kind of change possible would require making a tough choice. But if it happens this time, it will be because of a ranked choice. * Katrina vanden Heuvel is editorial director and publisher of the Nation, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, and a contributor to the [Washington Post](https://www.theguardian.com/media/washington-post), the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times
2025-06-28
  • When [Zohran Mamdani](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/zohran-mamdani), a 33-year-old self-described socialist, won New York’s mayoral Democratic nomination last week over a seasoned but scandal-scarred veteran, the city’s financial elite had a meltdown. This was the start of “hot commie summer” in the city, New York hedgevfund billionaire Daniel Loeb [posted to X](https://x.com/DanielSLoeb1/status/1937800092255183096). John Catsimatidis, billionaire CEO of grocery chain Gristedes and friend of Donald Trump, warned on Fox Business: “If the city of New York is going socialist, I will definitely close, or sell, or move.” CNBC financial news channel anchor Joe Kernen compared New York to Batman’s [crime-riddled Gotham](https://www.mediaite.com/media/tv/cnbcs-joe-kernen-compares-nyc-to-dystopian-gotham-from-the-batman-movies-after-zohran-mamdanis-victory/). “ They’re taking Wall Streeters and making them walk out onto the ice in the East River, And, and then they fall through. I mean there is a class warfare that’s going on.” With five months until the mayoral election proper, the 1% are revolting, led by loquacious billionaire hedge funder Bill Ackman, who said he and others in the finance industry are ready to commit “hundreds of millions of dollars” into an opposing campaign. “The risk/reward of running for mayor over the next 132 days is extremely compelling as the cost in time and energy is small and the upside is enormous.” Ackman said he was “gravely concerned” because he believed the leftwing candidate’s policies would trigger an exodus of the wealth that would destroy the tax base and undermine New York’s public services. The city under Mamdani, he [posted](https://archive.ph/o/H0KqO/https://x.com/BillAckman/status/1938094628034506984) on Wedneday, “is about to become much more dangerous and economically unviable.” In 2021, the top 1% of New York City taxpayers paid 48% of taxes – up from 40% in 2019, according to a report from the city’s finance department. But at the same time, New York has become an increasingly unaffordable city for those outside the 1% – [especially](https://citylimits.org/tale-of-two-cities-report-finds-stark-racial-wealth-gap-among-new-yorkers/) for people of color. In a post a day later, Ackman said: “The ability for [New York](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/new-york) City to offer services for the poor and needy, let alone the average New Yorker, is entirely dependent on New York City being a business-friendly environment and a place where wealthy residents are willing to spend 183 days and assume the associated tax burden. Unfortunately, both have already started making arrangements for the exits.” “Terror is the feeling,” Kathryn Wylde, the chief executive of the Partnership for New York City, which represents top business leaders, told CNBC on Tuesday. Gerard Filitti, senior legal counsel at the Lawfare Project, a pro-Israel thinktank, non-profit and litigation fund, and a New Yorker with strong ties to the finance industry, said Mamdani’s nomination “marked a dangerous turning point for the city”. “There’s big concern that businesses and the economy will be hurt. There’s already a move by business leaders and entrepreneurs to consider a move outside of the city, taking jobs and tax dollars with them, at time when the front-running candidate promises to make even more change that could destroy the economy,” Filitti said. The anger was not necessarily purely economic. Wall Street’s decision makers have been shaken after seeing their preferred candidate, Andrew Cuomo, pushed aside despite the millions they poured into his campaign. Fix the City, Cuomo’s political action committee (Pac), raised a record $25m to help see off Mamdani. Former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg alone gave $8.3m to the Pac. “These are billionaires who are giving hundreds of thousands and millions of dollars to Andrew Cuomo precisely because they know we are going to tax them to make life a little bit more affordable here, in the most expensive city in the United States,” Mamdani told the [New York Times](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/24/nyregion/andrew-cuomo-campaign-finance.html) before the election. “They know they can count on Cuomo because Cuomo has a track record of rewarding the political donors.” ![A Mamdani supporter wears a sticker that says ‘I didn’t rank Cuomo.’](https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/fca46b22a65d1d7819db58a74609d54d523d1cea/0_0_5262_3508/master/5262.jpg?width=445&dpr=1&s=none&crop=none)[](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jun/28/hot-commie-summer-zohran-mamdani#img-2) A Mamdani supporter wears a sticker that says ‘I didn’t rank Cuomo.’ Photograph: Heather Khalifa/AP New York’s moneyed class argues it’s not about them but the future of the city. “When you look at what New York City is and has been historically – a bastion of trading and the center of world capitalism, the engine of economic growth and prosperity, the stock market, an the inspiration for other world economies to develop their markets and economies in line with New York – and now what were seeing is an economy and quality of life that is slowly deteriorating,” said Filitti. “Now we have a front-running Democrat candidate who is promising even more radical change and that change is a threat to the structure of New York and the way people identify with New York City,” Filitti added. It’s an argument the rich have made many times before. Many of the 1% threatened to leave after former mayor Bill de Blasio called for raising their taxes to pay for the losses the city experienced after the Covid pandemic. Wall Street [poured millions](https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/14/nyc-mayor-race-wall-street-gives-millions-to-eric-adams-andrew-yang.html) into mayor Eric Adam’s 2021 campaign for office to see off more progressive candidates. They won those fights; this time, they lost. A former Wall Street CEO told Politico: “These titans of Wall Street and titans of finance are used to getting their way. They didn’t get their way. They got the opposite of their way. They got a guy who couldn’t be more disliked by them – and vice versa.” Wall Street’s vision for the city is probably far from that shared by many other residents of a sprawling metropolis that traditionally has played host to vibrant immigrant communities from all over the world, many of them poor. It is of course, host to the Statue of Liberty on whose base is written the famous lines: “Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.” Manhattan was also the birthplace of the Occupy Wall Street protests in the US back in 2011, which occupied the downtown Zucotti Square – blocks from Wall Street – and eventually saw protests spread across the rest of the country and the world. Democratic progressives were quick to celebrate Mamdani’s victory. “Your dedication to an affordable, welcoming, and safe New York City where working families can have a shot has inspired people across the city. Billionaires and lobbyists poured millions against you and our public finance system. And you won,” [wrote](https://x.com/AOC/status/1937708449661370542) representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, another progressive who won out against a more establishment candidate. Another longtime critic of Wall Street and the billionaire class also saw a change in politics as usual. “The American people are beginning to stand up and fight back. We have seen that in the many [Fighting Oligarchy](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/apr/12/bernie-sanders-rally-los-angeles) events that we’ve done around the country that have drawn huge turnouts. We have seen that in the millions of people who came out for the [No Kings rallies](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jun/19/no-kings-how-many-protesters-attended) that took place this month in almost every state. And yesterday, we saw that in the Democratic primary in New York City,” senator [Bernie Sanders](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/jun/25/democrats-learn-zohran-mamdani-victory) wrote in The Guardian. Millions will now be spent attacking Mamdani. But he has seen off one well-funded attempt to derail his campaign. Whether or not his campaign has the momentum to last until November, remains to be seen. But Wall Streeters have been put on notice that New York, and the changing nature of the Democratic party, may no longer be as amenable to their interests, or their vision for New York.
2025-07-08
  • Jul 8, 2025 11:17 AM Elon Musk is attempting to manifest his “America Party” into existence. But who will join him? ![Photo collage of Elon Musk breaking through a big piece of paper with the Republican elephant symbol on it](https://media.wired.com/photos/686c0f7327130ca052a84d79/master/w_2560%2Cc_limit/politics_musk_third_party.jpg) Photo-illustration: WIRED Staff; Getty Images Elon Musk soft-launched a third party over the weekend, and so far, the billionaire seems to be manifesting his “America Party” into existence. Hard-launching the party, which he first posted about through a [poll on X](https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1941119099532378580?s=46&t=lf_0P7vXDlL3MH8GQFeCSw), would involve filing official paperwork, such as Federal Election Commission forms, and signing up to petition in individual states. Musk has not done those things yet. What Musk has done, however, is open the door for what could be the most well-funded attempt ever at launching a third party. Following his [forceful digs](https://www.wired.com/story/elon-musk-donald-trump-breakup/) at President Donald Trump about the One Big Beautiful Bill reconciliation package, and his seeming breakup with the president, Musk is starting big. On X, [Musk said](https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1941119099532378580) the America Party would involve narrowly targeting eight to 10 House seats and a smaller number of Senate seats to establish a presence in Congress. But it’s not really clear who, exactly, would constitute this new party, from the candidates to staff to supporters. All of it depends on who, like Musk, needs a new political home. A Home for the Weary … and Maybe the Crypto Bros ------------------------------------------------ Despite polling showing dissatisfaction among Americans with both parties—four in 10 voters overall and [76 percent of independents said in a June CNN poll](https://www.cnn.com/2025/06/01/politics/cnn-poll-republicans-democrats) that neither party has strong leadership or can get things done—it remains unclear whether there’s a true grassroots centrist phenomenon for Musk to tap into. “This is the attention economy,” a national strategist who has worked with minor parties says. “You’ve got to get people to care.” Musk’s target audience of centrists, they say, is mostly tuning out the news. In a midterm environment where the most dedicated partisan voters tend to show up, it’s hard to imagine an unprecedented flood of third-party voters. However, this strategist, who also has strong ties to the crypto community, said that the coalition could combine with their overlapping Silicon Valley comrades to give this yet-to-be-formed party a boost. Cryptocurrency donors, this source noted, are beginning to feel “jaded” about not securing many wins from the new administration despite pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into the 2024 campaign on Trump’s behalf. “Elon is famously very pro-crypto,” the independent party strategist tells me, “and I wouldn't be shocked if he starts hammering those lanes \[of crypto and the tech right\], whether it's on X or ads … You've got to build a coalition. One of the problems with third party is that you haven't had enough populace or even political critical mass in terms of people and excitement.” Silicon Valley’s new arrivals to the GOP also came away empty-handed on multiple fronts from Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill, most notably with a 10-year ban on state-level regulation of AI falling by the wayside after Senator Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee pulled her support, a development [reported by WIRED](https://www.wired.com/story/ai-moratorium-trump-megabill-blackburn/). Musk’s ability to drive attention is the best thing this fledgling third party could have going for it. “Hatertainment and angertainment,” the strategist says, “it’s probably a good thing for a third party.” The Suspects ------------ So, if this party were to actually materialize, who would possibly represent it? A number of politicians and operatives threw out a few names to WIRED: US representative Thomas Massie, a Kentucky Republican, who’s drawn Trump’s ire for voting against the One Big Beautiful Bill and Musk’s praise for vocally opposing it. In the Senate, it could be Pennsylvania Democrat (for now) John Fetterman or even Lisa Murkowski, the Alaska Republican who proved to be the deciding vote for Trump’s precious bill along with Vice President J.D. Vance as the tiebreaker. (Murkowski, notably, is already in a state with open primaries and does not have to worry about being paralyzed by a Trump-endorsed challenger in the way other Republican members fear.) A pair of Michiganders, Peter Meijer and Justin Amash, who both previously served in the House—Amash even left the GOP to become an independent then Libertarian while serving from 2019 to 2021—were also mentioned. (All of the politicians here didn’t reply to WIRED’s request for comment.) Andrew Yang also knows a thing or two about trying to make a third party work. He’s used his outfit, dubbed The Forward Party, to get more states to change their election laws to favor open primaries and ranked choice voting. He hasn’t had much success, but he’s not against Musk’s idea. “There are multiple members of Congress who could be enlisted to a new party,” Yang tells WIRED in a text message. “There’s a lot of discontent within existing officeholders who are at odds with their own party. That combined with races that could be contested by independents opens up a lot of opportunities.” He personally suggested Massie and Murkowski, while agreeing Amash and Fetterman could also be potential fits. Yang did not answer WIRED’s questions about whether he would join forces with Musk or if he thought the billionaire was too polarizing of a figure to lead a successful third party. In an interview with [Politico](https://www.politico.com/news/2025/07/07/musk-and-yang-have-connected-on-the-billionaires-third-party-threat-00441702) on Monday, Yang said he had been in touch with Musk about the America Party. Keeping his options open like this is classic Yang, a national campaign strategist who’s worked with him and been involved in other third-party efforts tells WIRED. “One of the best parts—and probably worst parts, according to some—about Andrew's philosophy on life and building things, is like, if people want to help you, _let them_,” this strategist tells me, requesting anonymity to candidly discuss Yang and Musk. “So, he's fine working with people that some would find antithetical or even immoral to various things … I’m pretty confident he’d be happy to work with whoever, frankly.” When WIRED relayed this comment to Yang, he replied “No comment” with a grinning emoji. The strategist also pointed to some former Trump enemies and organizations who might consider jumping on board. Among them would be alumni of Florida governor Ron DeSantis presidential campaign, who have an established relationship with Musk. Phil Cox, one of DeSantis’ top strategists and vendors in his 2024 presidential campaign, booked ample work with the billionaire’s America PAC supporting Trump. This was mainly facilitated through his firm P2 Public Affairs and another firm, GP3, along with its supporting affiliates, referred to by industry insiders as “the rollup.” (Included in the rollup is Blitz Canvassing, the firm responsible for the poor treatment of workers in Musk’s get-out-the-vote operation, as [reported by WIRED](https://www.wired.com/story/elon-musk-america-pac-blitz-canvassing-michigan-uhaul/).) WIRED reached out to all of the politicians mentioned and did not get a comment. Cox did not reply to a request for comment. A source familiar with Cox’s thinking tells WIRED in a text message that the relationship between Cox and Musk will not continue with the America Party. “There’s not a shot in hell Phil would work for a third party. He’s dedicated his life to electing Republicans and supports Trump 100%.” On Monday, [DeSantis brought up Musk’s third party, unprompted](https://floridianpress.com/2025/07/desantis-asks-elon-musk-for-political-help/). DeSantis suggested Musk’s new party would have “a monumental impact”—if he focused on a balanced budget amendment to the constitution, and later another amendment on congressional term limits—but could also throw races to the Democrats. “Look, I’m a Republican,” he said. “You know, I don’t wanna see that happen.” In a statement to WIRED, Molly Best, DeSantis’ deputy press secretary, claimed he could not have brought up Musk unprompted because other people had previously been asking him about the third-party venture. Best also said I was being “purposefully obtuse” in my characterization of the governor’s remarks on the America Party as "unprompted.” In the interest of the reader, and in defense against flacks trying to say words have completely fungible definitions, here is how DeSantis chose to introduce the topic: “And the final thing I’ll say is, I’ve been getting asked about this idea of this Elon Musk political party, and I just wanted to say that Elon Musk has been one of the most innovative entrepreneurs not just in our country's history but probably in world history, and I think he’s done a lot, he’s got a lot more left in the tank, obviously.” DeSantis would go on to chastise Congress for not codifying more cuts from Musk’s so-called Department of Government Efficiency and being reckless with the national debt. The other plausible shop, the independent strategist suggested, is Tusk Strategies, a firm stocked with alumni of former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg’s administration, which also worked on Yang’s mayoral campaigns and has ties to the Eric Adams [administration](https://www.cityandstateny.com/politics/2025/01/whos-who-eric-adams-administration/360056/). Bradley Tusk, the firm’s founder, says that he’s skeptical of Musk’s efforts so far. Tusk tells me in an email that unless Musk can “demonstrate a real vision and agenda” without saying and doing “crazy things that repel the people and candidates you need, then I don’t think anyone good would work for him on this unless they only care about the money (which some people do but most people who get into politics did so because they have some genuine beliefs and interests in policy too).” Otherwise, it will likely be slim pickings for Musk. “Staffing is one of your biggest challenges. Who works on these campaigns?” the strategist tells me. “Generally, it’s political consultants.” For younger staffers, it’s an even bigger challenge when it comes to how one weighs the reputational risk of stepping out against their own party. “If you wanna be a comms director, if you wanna be the next David Axelrod, it’s better to work for the party,” the strategist says, recalling struggles the Dean Phillips 2024 presidential campaign had with securing quality vendors and consultants because of fears they would lose out on major Democratic clients. A Quick History Lesson ---------------------- In typical Johnny-come-lately fashion from Musk, his certainty around the strength of his new party ignores the pile of failed third parties littered across US history. It’s been Democrats versus Republicans for quite some time: the [top five minor parties](https://www.statista.com/statistics/273743/number-of-registered-voters-in-the-united-states/) in the country, combined, still can’t even crack 1 or 2 percent of registered voters on their rolls. The best case scenario for Musk could be something akin to Ross Perot’s Reform Party. Perot made his biggest splash in the 1992 presidential election, where won 18.9 percent of the popular vote as an independent. He also won 8.4 percent of the popular vote in 1996. However, despite the Reform Party gaining ballot access in all 50 states that year—something Musk isn’t even shooting for, at least not yet—it failed to get any candidates elected to Congress. This historical pattern is part of what has Democrats feeling absolutely fine with whatever Musk chooses to do. “I hope Elon Musk mounts the most successful creation of a third party in political history,” Democratic pollster Evan Roth Smith tells WIRED, “and that it lasts exactly 18 months.” A third party like Musk’s, other pollsters believe, would take away more support from [Republicans than Democrats](https://www.newsweek.com/elon-musk-new-political-party-2095098). The stock market also provides some reason for optimism on the left. “I think it’s overrated,” says a Democratic strategist who requested anonymity to avoid entangling other clients. Musk’s role at Tesla, they say, is the main reason they think he won’t follow through with much. After his initial promise to step away from politics, going to war with Trump and the entire GOP by leading a third party is the last thing his company’s board and shareholders want to see right now. “And at some point,” the strategist adds, “they will take the keys away from him.” The Chatroom ------------ Among the steps Musk hasn’t taken to make his proposed party a reality is registering a trademark for it. WIRED’s Tim Marchman spoke with Thomas Kuracina, a Nevada inventor who did so July 5—the same day Musk announced the America Party’s formation. “My goal is to work with them because they didn't file it,” says Kuracina. “I reserved it for them. I can assign it to them. I can have them file it and I can abandon mine. There are many ways that they can obtain it. I'm not out to extort them.” What Kuracina wants is a seat at the table. Lamenting the influence of billionaires and the effects of the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in _Citizens United vs. FEC_ on US politics, he proposes that the America Party should call for a two-week primary and two-week general election that would be held online. His other proposals involve hiring large numbers of patent examiners and doing away with pork and the presidential pardon; he also supports the impeachment of President Donald Trump. He believes that Mark Cuban would be a better face for the project than Musk, who he says is too compromised from his time with the so-called Department of Government Efficiency. “Mr. Musk is not a popular guy. You don't hacksaw, you don't chain-saw change,” says Kuracina. “His theatrics were not very good. That was not a good representation of who we want.” Experts tell WIRED that if applicants for America Party-related trademarks like Kuracina aren’t actually using, or demonstrating an intent to use, the marks for commerce, it will be difficult to secure the rights to them. Kuracina, who says he hasn’t heard from Musk or anyone representing him, tells WIRED that he has no plans to use the mark “at this point in time.” (A New Jersey man who applied to [register](https://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=99268792&caseSearchType=US_APPLICATION&caseType=DEFAULT&searchType=statusSearch) “The America Party” for use on hats and T-shirts for babies, children, and adults the day after Musk’s announcement did not reply to WIRED’s request for comment.) Simply registering doesn’t mean someone will be granted a trademark. (“A lot of people think that if you just slap something on a T-shirt, that counts as trademark use and you can get a registration for that,” says Rachael Dickson, senior trademark counsel at Lloyd & Mousilli. “That's generally not true.”) Outside the context of direct negotiations, though, opportunities to dispute Kuracina’s right to the trademark won’t come up for months dating from the time of the application, meaning that Musk’s right to use his brainchild for marketing purposes could remain unclear for some time to come. Anthony Lupo, listed as attorney of record on trademark paperwork for Tesla, tells WIRED he can’t comment. Have any ideas for a fourth party? Leave a comment on the site or send your thoughts to [mail@wired.com](mailto:mail@wired.com). WIRED Reads ----------- _Want more?_ [_Subscribe now_](https://www.wired.com/v2/offers/wir_generic) _for unlimited access to WIRED._ What Else We’re Reading ----------------------- 🔗 **[MAGA World’s Mega Meltdown Over Latest Epstein Flop](https://www.thebulwark.com/p/maga-world-mega-meltdown-epstein-files-bondi-trump-musk-influencers-cernovich-posobiec-ohandley-client-list):** Elon Musk keeps bringing up the Jeffrey Epstein client list, which the DOJ now insists doesn’t exist. The online right has had enough, and they want Pam Bondi out as AG. **(The Bulwark)** 🔗 ‘**[But We’re Touching Medicaid in This Bill’](https://www.notus.org/congress/reconciliation-timeline-slipping-trump):** In another glimpse at the president not always knowing what’s going on with his own administration’s priorities, he appeared unaware in a meeting with House Republicans that the Big Beautiful Bill would cut Medicaid. **(NOTUS)** 🔗 **[Top Trump Adviser Sergio Gor Was Born in the Soviet Union](https://www.occrp.org/en/news/exclusive-top-trump-advisor-sergio-gor-was-born-in-the-soviet-union?utm_source=OCCRP&utm_campaign=96d69ab181-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2025_07_08_09_15&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_bcc1d53473-96d69ab181-712201321):** White House personnel director Sergio Gor’s lawyer confirms he was born in Uzbekistan back when it was part of the Soviet Union, not in Malta, after previously declining to say where he was born. **(Times of Malta, Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project)** The Download ------------ Our flagship show _Uncanny Valley,_ guest hosted by senior politics editor Leah Feiger and featuring investigative data reporter Dhruv Mehrotra, dives deeper into WIRED’s recent reporting on the 911 calls from inside ICE detention facilities. [Listen now.](https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/uncanny-valley-wired/id266391367) Thanks again for subscribing. You can find me on [Bluesky](https://bsky.app/profile/jakelahut.writes.news) or on Signal at Leak2Lahut.26.
2025-07-12
  • “You want a new political party and you shall have it!” [Elon Musk](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/elon-musk) declared in early July. The world’s richest man is never one to shy away from grandiose statements, and he continued: “When it comes to bankrupting our country with waste & graft, we live in a one-party system, not a democracy. Today, the [America Party](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/jul/05/elon-musk-america-party-congress) is formed to give you back your freedom.” The America party, Musk hopes, will be a viable alternative to the [Democratic](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/democrats) and [Republican](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/republicans) parties: a political organization that can influence the future of US politics. He has mooted running candidates for two to three Senate seats and up to 10 House districts. Given the tight divide between Republicans and Democrats in Congress, Musk believes capturing the small number of seats “would be enough to serve as the deciding vote on contentious laws”. Given there is consistently strong support for an alternative to the Big Two parties, it should be a good idea, right? Wrong, said Bernard Tamas, professor of political science at Valdosta State University and author of The Demise and Rebirth of American Third Parties. “At this moment in American politics, I see no evidence that you’re going to get another party winning seats in [Congress](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/us-congress) and actually being able to have an impact in the government,” Tamas said. “It’s not just the money that Democrats and Republicans have. They have all the resources. They have the money. They have 150 years of structure. They have all the professional politicians, and they have all the consultants, and they have all the Madison Avenue ad [companies](https://www.businessinsider.com/madison-ave-ad-agencies-2013-2) working for them.” The whole concept of the America party seemingly came together in a matter of weeks, following the famous row between Musk and Donald Trump. And as with many ideas born out of spite and fury, certain elements appear to have not been fully thought through. [Americaparty.com](http://americaparty.com/), for example, is already registered to someone else, who now appears to be trying to sell the domain name for $6.9m. On X, which Musk owns, @AmericaParty was already taken, so the new venture had to opt for @AmericaPartyX. It’s not yet clear what the party will stand for, beyond opposition to Republicans’ ballooning of the [national debt](http://theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jun/29/senate-debate-trump-bill). Musk has yet to elaborate on the “contentious laws” his politicians would challenge, and there is no party platform or manifesto. In any case, third parties have rarely, if ever, been successful in the way Musk [envisages](https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1941125459628179641). But where they can make a difference is in highlighting issues and pressuring the main two parties to act. “In terms of the parties that really had a big impact, they didn’t win seats,” Tamas said. “The job of third parties is disruption. It’s to sting like a bee. It’s to cause pain.” Tamas pointed to the Progressive party in Wisconsin and the Minnesota Farmer-Labor party, which [managed to win](https://www3.mnhs.org/mnopedia/search/index/minnesota-farmer-labor-party-1924-1944) key victories over relief for unemployed constituents and banking reform in the state, as examples of political groups that have managed to inflict such a bee sting. That doesn’t appear to be what Musk is going for, however, despite there being an opportunity for a stinging insect. “Here you have the Republican party moving farther and farther to the right, and farther and farther in this kind of Maga direction, with nobody in the Republican party in Congress willing to stand up at all to Trump or this movement,” Tamas said. “It’s a perfect opening for a third party. This is what it looks like historically. But you’re not going to replace them. What you do is you attack them for this. You’re trying to pull them back towards the center. “This is how the third parties have always succeeded. The idea is you cause them pain, and what they do, if it works, is they shift back towards something that reflects more what the public wants, or deals with the issues that the third party is bringing up.” Parties that have pursued the getting-people-elected approach have fared less well than the pain-inflictors. Forward party was founded by Andrew Yang, who had previously run for the Democratic presidential nomination, in 2022, with the slightly call-to-arms style slogan of “Not left. Not right. Forward.” These days the party barely features on the national political landscape, although it does continue to bleat out social media content – a recent 4 July post on Instagram attracted [almost 40 likes](https://www.instagram.com/p/DLsENvzOMMv/). At its inception, Forward party figures claimed both the Republican and Democratic parties had become too radical, and said their new venture “can’t be pegged to the traditional left-right spectrum because we aren’t built like the existing parties”. Somehow, a promise to not really have a firm ideological stance on anything isn’t a very sexy pitch to voters. Among the “elected affiliates” [named](https://www.forwardparty.com/electeds/) on Forward’s website are the former mayor of Newberry, Florida, a town of 7,300 people, and a man who “is responsible for sanitation and utilities” in the Connecticut borough of Stonington – population 976 people. There is widespread support for a third party. [Polls](https://news.gallup.com/poll/651278/support-third-political-party-dips.aspx) have repeatedly shown that people want a third party. But what that looks like remains to be seen. In Musk’s own survey on social media asking if people wanted him to start a new party, only 65% said yes, and 34% said no, although [a poll](https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/national/article310297985.html#storylink=cpy) in early July showed that 14% of voters said they would be very likely to support the party, with 26% somewhat likely. There are already issues with the America party becoming a viable third choice. Musk is approaching eccentric political advisers, including [Curtis Yarvin](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/09/us/politics/elon-musk-curtis-yarvin-third-party.html), a rightwing tech blogger who has argued American democracy has run its course and the country should instead be run by a dictator-esque CEO. A more fundamental problem with the America party is unique to Musk: people really don’t like him. A [poll](https://data.ddhq.io/polls/2025/07/08/YouGov/The%20Economist-National-2025-07-04-2025-07-07) last week found that 60% of Americans have an unfavorable view of Musk, compared with 32% in favor. America shall have a third party, Musk declared at the start of his new venture. But does America want this kind of third party, with these kind of aims, run by this kind of man?