This election year dramatically differs from those of decades past, due primarily to the success of self-proclaimed outsiders entering the election cycle. The most notable have been Bernie Sanders, who has held political office for thirty-four years and counting, and Donald Trump, a real estate tycoon and multi-billionaire. Despite Sanders' decades serving in office, he is still considered an anti-establishment candidate due to his long-standing status as an independent, up until recently having no affiliation with either of the two major political parties in America. Donald Trump has no political experience whatsoever, and in that regard truly is an outsider.

Throughout this election season, we have born witness to the rapid rise of these anti-establishment figures, seemingly in spite of the mainstream media's dismissal of such candidates. So why have these figures, who have defied all norms associated with running for any political office, much less the presidency, who have been mocked and dismissed by the media, and who are faced with tremendous opposition from their own parties, gained so much widespread support in this election cycle?

The American people are sick of the status quo. They are sick of politicians whom they see as sleazy and self-serving, exploiting the dreams of Americans to fatten their wallets and advance their careers. Before the election had even begun, the democratic nominee had already been presumptively chosen. Hillary Clinton, former Secretary of State, former First Lady, former Senator, as well as former candidate for president in 2008, is the living embodiment of the establishment that America resents. A recent Washington Post-ABC News national poll showed that a mere 37% of Americans believe Clinton to be trustworthy, most likely due to her long history of scandal, from Clinton bragging about defending and securing a plea deal for a child rapist to her alleged failure in regards to the Benghazi crisis, and her latest scandal involving her alleged misuse of a private email server. Whether or not the numerous allegations regarding Clinton are credible is irrelevant at this point. The fact of the matter is that Clinton has built up a image of dishonesty and deceit in the eyes of most Americans. Clinton's shifting stance on nearly all major issues of recent years is troubling to say the least, such as her unflinching support of the Iraq War, as well as her stark opposition to gay marriage until it became the popular position to take. Her close relationship to Wall Street, including the $675,000 paid to her by Goldman Sachs to give speeches, which she has since refused to release to the public. Looking at her public record, not to mention the long history of scandal that proceeds her, it does not come as a surprise that many Americans are bitter at the Democratic establishment for crowning her as the presumptive nominee for the party. It comes as little surprise that the disenfranchised liberals of America, resentful of the direction that their party is going, turn to an alternative candidate, whom they feel is honest and genuine, willing to stand up for liberal values, a candidate like Bernie Sanders.

The 72 year old Senator from Vermont is the longest serving Independent in Congressional history, and in the eyes of many progressives has been on the right side of history since his college years, when he marched with King during the Civil Rights Movement. Sanders' support for Gay rights and vocal opposition to the Iraq War provide a stark contrast between himself and Secretary Clinton. Despite him being a self proclaimed 'democratic socialist,' Sanders has gained widespread popularity, particularly among millennials, who feel like they have been unfairly burdened with the debts of generations past. The new generation feels increasingly disenfranchised with the system and the establishment as a whole, hence the rise of Sanders, who promises a 'political revolution,' fighting for debt free tuition, a living wage, and a single player health care system.

The GOP has been dealing with a similar crisis, a large number of Republicans rebelling against their own party and throwing their support behind Donald Trump. The polarizing figure has managed to draw bipartisan hatred from both liberals and conservatives, although for entirely different reasons. Trump is disliked by the GOP primarily because of his unpredictability, flip-flopping his positions on nearly every major issue. Trump has been both pro choice and pro life, pro nonintervention and pro-killing the families of alleged terrorists, to name a few changes. Trump is seemingly uncontrollable, beholden to only himself, and, up until recently, Trump has self-funded his own campaign, an approach that is next to unheard of as most funding for candidates comes from a select few billionaires. Many of Trump's policy positions could even be considered progressive, such as his support for a universal health care system, as well as an increase of taxes on the wealthy, and he even supports limited funding for Planned Parenthood, alienating the evangelical vote. Trump also does not appear to be particularly religious, despite his claims to the contrary. Liberals have no love for Trump either, due to what many see as his history of xenophobic, racist, hate speech. Trump has been accused of inciting violence at his rallies, even offering to pay the legal bills of anyone who would assault a protestor during a rally. Trump has vowed to ban all muslims from entering the US until further notice. Trump's variety of offensive remarks range from insulting women with which he disagreed to attacking multiple minority communities including African Americans and hispanics. He initially refused to disavow the support of former Klan leader David Duke, as well as the endorsements of several supremacist organizations. Trump has attacked Mexican immigrants, stating, ''They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.'' In regards to climate change Trump has stated that, ''The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive.'' Donald Trump has built his campaign around the concept that Washington is hopelessly corrupt, with special interests ruling politicians, and that Washington needs a political outsider not controlled by corporate money to overthrow the status quo, an ideology near identical to that of Bernie Sanders.

Trump and Sanders, despite appearing to be polar opposites at first glance, both identify as political outsiders, seeking to destroy a corrupt establishment, and revolutionize a broken system. Their biggest difference between the two is the tactics they preach to fix it. Trump espouses a nationalistic approach, embracing a populist, nativist message, blaming the supposed decline of America on an influx of immigrants flooding the borders. Sanders points the blame up to the top 1%, the elite, who, he argues, do not pay their fair share. Sanders blames Wall Street for taking advantage of the American people, crashing the housing market in 2008, then receiving a federal bailout and walking away scot free. Sanders argues that the decline of America's middle class rests on the politicians who are controlled by their corporate benefactors, the lobbyists who choose to enrich themselves rather than the middle class. Both men defy their party establishments and both the DNC and RNC have done all that is in their power to oppose the outsiders.

The DNC prevailed over Sanders, successfully blocking his path to the nomination, with little to no chance of Sanders catching up to Clinton. The RNC has not been so successful, with Trump fighting his way to the nomination by bullying and mocking his opponents, all the while priding himself on his political incorrectness. The rise of Sanders and Trump are indicative of a growing sense of unrest in America, as the middle-class fades and jobs disappear while the establishment on both sides do nothing to prevent it, or even deny the problem itself. The many problems with America have been established, the only question is how do we fix it, and who do we blame?