Politics
Analysis: Europe, too, feels Musk's political impact. How far will it go?
In the six weeks since Donald Trump won the presidential election, Europe has been bracing for a U.S. administration that could strain traditional transatlantic alliances.
That sense of uncertainty has just been turbocharged by a disruptive new force: multibillionaire Elon Musk, who has made it clear he intends to leave his mark on politics and policy not only in Washington but in Europe as well.
On Friday, as U.S. lawmakers were racing to avert a looming government shutdown, Musk used his social media platform X to tout his strong support for a far-right political party in Germany that is looking to increase its clout in the wake of this month’s meltdown of the three-party ruling coalition of Chancellor Olaf Scholz.
“Only the AfD can save Germany,” Musk wrote, using the German initials for Alternative for Germany, the party best known for its stridently anti-immigrant stance, longtime ties to neo-Nazis and the “extremist” designation that Germany’s domestic intelligence service has given its youth wing.
The world’s richest man had previously made provocative statements about German politics, but the timing of his latest remarks — coinciding with signals he intends to leverage his Trump administration position leading an advisory commission on government efficiency into a wide-ranging role in the new U.S. administration — stirred unease not only in Germany but across Europe.
Establishment parties and governments elsewhere on the continent are feeling vulnerable after a series of anti-system jolts, including the ouster this month of France’s prime minister, Michel Barnier, in a heavy blow to President Emmanuel Macron, who appointed him.
Mainstay organizations including the European Union and NATO also are watching and worrying over the potential for destabilizing moves by Trump that could include protracted trade disputes and a withdrawal of crucial U.S. military support for Ukraine as it seeks to fight off a nearly three-year-old full-scale invasion by Russia.
Musk’s foray into German politics came just after far-right British politician Nigel Farage, who for years has been a fixture in Trump’s orbit, declared this week that the South African-born Tesla and Space X magnate was considering a historically large contribution to his Reform U.K. party — prompting calls for swift action to tighten Britain’s rules on political donations, which are already far stricter than those in the United States.
In Germany, Europe’s economic powerhouse and political center of gravity, Musk’s commentary roiled the political establishment — and drew expressions of glee from supporters of the AfD, whose nationalist-populist message has helped it make inroads this year in state and European Parliament elections.
The party hopes to mount a strong challenge to Friedrich Merz, the frontrunner to replace Scholz in a national vote expected in February, but other leading political blocs have already declared they would not accept the AfD as a coalition partner.
AfD’s leader Alice Weidel quickly thanked Musk for his online vote of confidence, declaring: “You are perfectly right!”
In a video posted on X shortly after the billionaire’s accolade landed, she said the AfD “is indeed the one and only alternative for our country — our last option, if you ask me!”
Scholz has been something of a punching bag for his opponents across the political spectrum over Germany’s floundering economy, but the Musk broadside prompted some of his chief rivals to come to his defense — often with acid commentary about Musk.
“We usually hear that Elon Musk is this gifted wunderkind, but when I hear these comments, I have to doubt that,” Alexander Throm of the center-right Christian Democratic Union, which is leading opinion polls in advance of February’s vote, told the public broadcaster Deutsche Welle.
Another Christian Democratic politician, lawmaker Dennis Radtke, branded Musk’s remarks as interference in German elections. Speaking to the Handelsblatt daily, he called the comments “threatening, irritating and unacceptable.”
Rare agreement came from a leading politician in what is considered the most leftist party in Germany’s political mix. “He’s not really contributing anything, policywise,” Clara Buenger of the Left Party said of Musk.
“He doesn’t really know how political discussions work in Germany,” she said.
Scholz himself adhered at least in part to his typical low-key political style in responding to this episode. Without naming Musk, he pointed out that Germany’s political system allows for freedom of expression, which “also applies to multibillionaires.”
But the chancellor used sharper than usual language, for him, to challenge Musk’s characterization of the AfD as a national savior. Freedom to speak out, he said pointedly, “also means that you’re allowed to say things which aren’t correct, and aren’t good political advice.”
Musk also had jeered at the collapse of the governing coalition, and at one point tweeted in German that the chancellor was a “fool.” Scholz responded at the time that the remark was “not very friendly.”
The billionaire entrepreneur-turned-efficiency expert has opined previously about the AfD, expressing his bafflement at the mainstream unease it prompts within Germany over echoes of the country’s Nazi past.
The country has legal prohibitions on use of Third Reich-style language and symbols, and there has been more than one case involving prosecution of an AfD figure for flouting those laws.
“They keep saying ‘far right,’ but the policies of AfD that I’ve read about don’t sound extremist,” Musk posted in June. “Maybe I’m missing something.”
In the United States, Trump’s elevation of Musk has prompted little opposition from within his own Republican party. In Europe, however, there is considerably more wariness.
After British politician Farage was pictured posing this week with Musk at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort, and Farage confirmed that a potentially huge donation from Musk to his party could be in play — $100 million, according to at least one British report — some British lawmakers and transparency advocates urged that measures be put in place to prevent such an unprecedentedly large infusion of foreign cash.
While Britain curtails how much political parties are allowed to spend on elections, there is no ceiling on donations from within the United Kingdom. Musk could get around that with the British registration of the British arm of X.
“It’s crucial that U.K. voters have trust in the financing of our political system,” the chief executive of Britain’s Electoral Commission, Vijay Rangarajan, told the Guardian newspaper. “The system needs strengthening.”
Musk has made clear his disdain for Prime Minister Keir Starmer of the left-leaning Labor Party, and has often voiced criticism of British policies on immigration and policing.
Farage, for his part, cites Trump as a populist role model, and shares the president-elect’s antipathy toward bodies such as the European Union. His Reform party picked up about 14% of the vote in June elections, its strongest showing ever.
Politics
Video: Trump’s War of Choice With Iran
new video loaded: Trump’s War of Choice With Iran
By David E. Sanger, Gilad Thaler, Thomas Vollkommer and Laura Salaberry
March 1, 2026
Politics
Dems’ potential 2028 hopefuls come out against US strikes on Iran
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Some of the top rumored Democratic potential candidates for president in 2028 are showing a united front in opposing U.S. strikes on Iran, with several high-profile figures accusing President Donald Trump of launching an unnecessary and unconstitutional war.
Former Vice President Kamala Harris said Trump was “dragging the United States into a war the American people do not want.”
“Let me be clear: I am opposed to a regime-change war in Iran, and our troops are being put in harm’s way for the sake of Trump’s war of choice,” Harris said in a statement Saturday following the joint U.S. and Israeli strikes throughout Iran.
“This is a dangerous and unnecessary gamble with American lives that also jeopardizes stability in the region and our standing in the world,” she continued. “What we are witnessing is not strength. It is recklessness dressed up as resolve.”
Former Vice President Kamala Harris, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and California Gov. Gavin Newsom are leading Democratic 2028 hopefuls who spoke out against U.S. strikes on Iran. (Big Event Media/Getty Images for HumanX Conference; Reuters/Liesa Johannssen; Mario Tama/Getty Images)
California Gov. Gavin Newsom delivered some of his sharpest criticism during a book tour stop Saturday night in San Francisco, accusing Trump of manufacturing a crisis.
“It stems from weakness masquerading as strength,” Newsom said. “He lied to you. So reckless is the only way to describe this.”
“He didn’t describe to the American people what the endgame is here,” Newsom added. “There wasn’t one. He manufactured it.”
Newsom is currently promoting his memoir, “Young Man in a Hurry,” with recent and upcoming stops in South Carolina, New Hampshire and Nevada — three key early voting states in the Democratic presidential calendar.
Earlier in the day, Newsom said Iran’s “corrupt and repressive” regime must never obtain nuclear weapons and that the “leadership of Iran must go.”
“But that does not justify the President of the United States engaging in an illegal, dangerous war that will risk the lives of our American service members and our friends without justification to the American people,” Newsom wrote on X.
California is home to more than half of the roughly 400,000 Iranian immigrants in the United States, including a large community in West Los Angeles often referred to as “Tehrangeles.”
DEMOCRATS BUCK PARTY LEADERS TO DEFEND TRUMP’S ‘DECISIVE ACTION’ ON IRAN
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., a leading progressive voice and “Squad” member, accused Trump of dragging Americans into a conflict they did not support.
“The American people are once again dragged into a war they did not want by a president who does not care about the long-term consequences of his actions. This war is unlawful. It is unnecessary. And it will be catastrophic,” Ocasio-Cortez said.
“Just this week, Iran and the United States were negotiating key measures that could have staved off war. The President walked away from these discussions and chose war instead,” she continued.
“In moments of war, our Constitution is unambiguous: Congress authorizes war. The President does not,” she said, pledging to vote “YES on Representatives Ro Khanna and Thomas Massie’s War Powers Resolution.”
Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker criticized the strikes and accused Trump of ignoring Congress. (Daniel Boczarski/Getty Images for Vox Media)
Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, another Democrat often mentioned as a potential 2028 contender, also criticized the strikes and accused Trump of ignoring Congress.
“No justification, no authorization from Congress, and no clear objective,” Pritzker wrote on X.
“Donald Trump is once again sidestepping the Constitution and once again failing to explain why he’s taking us into another war,” he continued. “Americans asked for affordable housing and health care, not another potentially endless conflict.”
“God protect our troops,” Pritzker added.
Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro focused his criticism on war powers, arguing Trump acted outside constitutional guardrails.
“In our democracy, the American people — through our elected representatives — decide when our nation goes to war,” Shapiro said, adding that Trump “acted unilaterally — without Congressional approval.”
JONATHAN TURLEY: TRUMP STRIKES IRAN — PRECEDENT AND HISTORY ARE ON HIS SIDE
Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro focused his criticism on war powers, arguing Trump acted outside constitutional guardrails. (Rachel Wisniewski/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
“Make no mistake, the Iranian regime represses its own people… they must never be allowed to possess nuclear weapons,” he said. “But that does not justify the President of the United States engaging in an illegal, dangerous war.”
Shapiro added that “Congress must use all available power” to prevent further escalation.
Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg also accused Trump of launching a “war of choice.”
“The President has launched our nation and our great military into a war of choice, risking American lives and resources, ignoring American law, and endangering our allies and partners,” Buttigieg wrote on X. “This nation learned the hard way that an unnecessary war, with no plan for what comes next, can lead to years of chaos and put America in still greater danger.”
Buttigieg has been hitting early voting states, stopping in New Hampshire and Nevada in recent weeks to campaign for Democrats ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.
Sen. Ruben Gallego, D-Ariz., who has been floated as a rising national figure within the party, said he lost friends in Iraq to an illegal war and opposed the strikes.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
“Young working-class kids should not pay the ultimate price for regime change and a war that hasn’t been explained or justified to the American people. We can support the democracy movement and the Iranian people without sending our troops to die,” Gallego wrote on X.
Fox News’ Daniel Scully and Alex Nitzberg contributed to this report.
Politics
Commentary: With midterm vote starting, here’s where things stand in national redistricting fight
Donald Trump has never been one to play by the rules.
Whether it’s stiffing contractors as a real estate developer, defying court orders he doesn’t like as president or leveraging the Oval Office to vastly inflate his family’s fortune, Trump’s guiding principle can be distilled to a simple, unswerving calculation: What’s in it for me?
Trump is no student of history. He’s famously allergic to books. But he knows enough to know that midterm elections like the one in November have, with few exceptions, been ugly for the party holding the presidency.
With control of the House — and Trump’s virtually unchecked authority — dangling by a gossamer thread, he reckoned correctly that Republicans were all but certain to lose power this fall unless something unusual happened.
So he effectively broke the rules.
Normally, the redrawing of the country’s congressional districts takes place once every 10 years, following the census and accounting for population changes over the previous decade. Instead, Trump prevailed upon the Republican governor of Texas, Greg Abbott, to throw out the state’s political map and refashion congressional lines to wipe out Democrats and boost GOP chances of winning as many as five additional House seats.
The intention was to create a bit of breathing room, as Democrats need a gain of just three seats to seize control of the House.
In relatively short order, California’s Democratic governor, Gavin Newsom, responded with his own partisan gerrymander. He rallied voters to pass a tit-for-tat ballot measure, Proposition 50, which revised the state’s political map to wipe out Republicans and boost Democratic prospects of winning as many as five additional seats.
Then came the deluge.
In more than a dozen states, lawmakers looked at ways to tinker with their congressional maps to lift their candidates, stick it to the other party and gain House seats in November.
Some of those efforts continue, including in Virginia where, as in California, voters are being asked to amend the state Constitution to let majority Democrats redraw political lines ahead of the midterm. A special election is set for April 21.
But as the first ballots of 2026 are cast on Tuesday — in Arkansas, North Carolina and Texas — the broad contours of the House map have become clearer, along with the result of all those partisan machinations. The likely upshot is a nationwide partisan shift of fewer than a handful of seats.
The independent, nonpartisan Cook Political Report, which has a sterling decades-long record of election forecasting, said the most probable outcome is a wash. “At the end of the day,” said Erin Covey, who analyzes House races for the Cook Report, “this doesn’t really benefit either party in a real way.”
Well.
That was a lot of wasted time and energy.
Let’s take a quick spin through the map and the math, knowing that, of course, there are no election guarantees.
In Texas, for instance, new House districts were drawn assuming Latinos would back Republican candidates by the same large percentage they supported Trump in 2024. But that’s become much less certain, given the backlash against his draconian immigration enforcement policies; numerous polls show a significant falloff in Latino support for the president, which could hurt GOP candidates up and down the ballot.
But suppose Texas Republicans gain five seats as hoped for and California Democrats pick up the five seats they’ve hand-crafted. The result would be no net change.
Elsewhere, under the best case for each party, a gain of four Democratic House seats in Virginia would be offset by a gain of four Republican House seats in Florida.
That leaves a smattering of partisan gains here and there. A combined pickup of four or so Republican seats in Ohio, North Carolina and Missouri could be mostly offset by Democratic gains of a seat apiece in New York, Maryland and Utah.
(The latter is not a result of legislative high jinks, but rather a judge throwing out the gerrymandered map passed by Utah Republicans, who ignored a voter-approved ballot measure intended to prevent such heavy-handed partisanship. A newly created district, contained entirely within Democratic-leaning Salt Lake County, seems certain to go Democrats’ way in November.)
In short, it’s easy to characterize the political exertions of Trump, Abbott, Newsom and others as so much sound and fury producing, at bottom, little to nothing.
But that’s not necessarily so.
The campaign surrounding Proposition 50 delivered a huge political boost to Newsom, shoring up his standing with Democrats, significantly raising his profile across the country and, not least for his 2028 presidential hopes, helping the governor build a significant nationwide fundraising base.
In crimson-colored Indiana, Republicans refused to buckle under tremendous pressure from Trump, Vice President JD Vance and other party leaders, rejecting an effort to redraw the state’s congressional map and give the GOP a hold on all nine House seats. That showed even Trump’s Svengali-like hold on his party has its limits.
But the biggest impact is also the most corrosive.
By redrawing political lines to predetermine the outcome of House races, politicians rendered many of their voters irrelevant and obsolete. Millions of Democrats in Texas, Republicans in California and partisans in other states have been effectively disenfranchised, their voices rendered mute. Their ballots spindled and nullified.
In short, the politicians — starting with Trump — extended a big middle finger to a large portion of the American electorate.
Is it any wonder, then, so many voters hold politicians and our political system in contempt?
-
World4 days agoExclusive: DeepSeek withholds latest AI model from US chipmakers including Nvidia, sources say
-
Massachusetts4 days agoMother and daughter injured in Taunton house explosion
-
Montana1 week ago2026 MHSA Montana Wrestling State Championship Brackets And Results – FloWrestling
-
Denver, CO4 days ago10 acres charred, 5 injured in Thornton grass fire, evacuation orders lifted
-
Louisiana7 days agoWildfire near Gum Swamp Road in Livingston Parish now under control; more than 200 acres burned
-
Technology1 week agoYouTube TV billing scam emails are hitting inboxes
-
Technology1 week agoStellantis is in a crisis of its own making
-
Politics1 week agoOpenAI didn’t contact police despite employees flagging mass shooter’s concerning chatbot interactions: REPORT