Lets talk about language. Because in politics, language isnt just what you say its what people hear. And if theres one thing Ive learned from decades of helping brands and campaigns get their words right, its this: the wrong message can kill even the best idea. Tesla CEO Elon Musks America Party is a case study in how not to build trust through language.Ive seen this movie before. I started my career on Ross Perots campaign, where we learned firsthand how the right words can electrify a movement and how quickly the wrong ones can turn hope into skepticism. Perots success was based on his ability to connect with voters using language that was clear, relatable and believable. He spent a lot of time talking about a broken system, but he did so in a way that made people believe change was possible.Musk, on the other hand, is using the language of disruption without understanding the language of trust. And thats why his America Party is likely to be just another blip in the long history of failed third-party efforts.LIZ PEEK: MUSK THROWS HIS OWN PARTY BECAUSE HES MAD AT PRESIDENT TRUMPLets break down Musks messaging. He says its "time for a new political party that actually cares about the people." He talks about "reducing government spending," dismantling regulatory bloat, and embracing AI-driven modernization. These are buzzwords, not beliefs. Theyre designed to provoke, not persuade.Heres the problem: Americans are already drowning in distrust. They dont believe politicians. They dont believe in institutions. And they certainly dont believe that this billionaire with a Twitter habit is suddenly going to care about the people. Musks words are meant to sound populist, but they just sound AI-generated.Slogans can help build trust but trust cannot be built on slogans alone. Its built on language that resonates, connects to peoples real concerns and is grounded in actions that create credibility. Perot was also a billionaire, but he understood how to speak the language of the average person and make it feel real. ELON MUSK CONNECTS WITH INDIE ANDREW YANG ON BILLIONAIRE FORMER TRUMP ALLY'S THIRD PARTY PUSHMusk, by contrast, is speaking at people, not to them.Musks messaging is heavy on tech jargon and light on empathy. AI-driven modernization might excite Silicon Valley, but its a scary prospect for many voters increasingly worried about their job, their healthcare or their kids future. Start-up language is sexy if youre a venture capitalist.But Musk doesnt understand that most Americans dont speak the language of technology. TRUMP DISMISSES MUSK'S POLITICAL AMBITIONS AS 'RIDICULOUS' IN SHARP REBUKEPerot was also a tech entrepreneur, but he left talk of mainframes out of his campaign. His version of reducing regulatory bloat was much simpler: "if you see a snake, just kill itdon't appoint a committee on snakes."We once had a client who wanted to test a campaign designed to show how much they cared about their customers. The slogan: "We care." As we expected, it bombed in testing. The companys actions did not support the message. The same is true for Musk. Musk says he wants a party that "actually cares about the people." But the language he uses doesnt show care it shows calculation. Its the language of someone who wants to be seen as a disruptor, not someone who wants to build trust.CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINIONWords like "disruption," "modernization," and "efficiency" are the language of business (and often of layoffs), not the language of belonging. They dont answer the fundamental question every voter is asking: "Do you understand me? Do you care about what I care about?" If you cant answer that in your messaging, youve already lost.ELON MUSK LAUNCHES AMERICA PARTY AFTER TRUMP SIGNS HISTORIC SPENDING BILL: 'WASTE & GRAFT'Its unclear if Musk is really serious about building something new or just tearing down something Trump. But if he wants to build a movement, he needs to do more than talk about whats wrong. Thats the easy part. Perot also said the system was broken. But he made the problem understandable and he made a solution seem achievable. He made the deficit real. He made government waste personal. He made it feel like we could all roll up our sleeves and fix it. Ultimately, he had his own issues, but at the peak of his campaign, 39% of the population said they planned to vote for him.So much has changed since 1992, but building a third party in America remains one of the hardest jobs in politics. The only way to even start to make it work is to find language that creates hope, engenders optimism and illuminates a path to overcoming challenges that a significant plurality of Americans care about. Ironically, in the same poll that showed Perot leading the race, 65% of the public said they would be less likely to vote for a candidate who "made a fortune doing business with the federal government." So maybe less has changed than we think.