This election cycle has proved to be unique for many independent movements. Formerly Independent Senator Bernie Sanders has put up a fight for the Democratic nomination for the presidency, winning many states in a tight race against former Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton. Sanders’s campaign has focused heavily on economic inequality and a fight against Wall Street, appearing to be a culmination of the Occupy Movement. Sanders has drawn in large crowds and energized millennials and left-wingers alike. However; his campaign is built on an uphill battle and Clinton is still seen by many as the presumptive nominee. In the situation that Sanders does not win the nomination, there will be many energized Sanders fans feeling Bern’d. Where these fans go will be crucial to whether or not the world of politics will remain in “business as usual” mode.

In the American two-party system, people are guilted into voting for the “lesser of two evils.” Democrats are certainly at fault for this. In the 1890s a large populist movement grew, the left-wing farmers were consumed by the Democratic Party in the 1896 election with the nomination of populist-leaning Secretary of State William Jennings Bryan, ultimately an unsuccessful candidate. There was the consumption of the labor movement by the New Deal Democrats. There were the “New Left” and Civil Rights movements consumed by the Democrats with the failed nomination of protest candidate Senator Eugene McCarthy in 1968, Jesse Jackson in 1968 and the nomination of protest candidate Senator George McGovern who lost in the general election.

Senator Eugene McCarthy’s bid for the presidency in 1968 is comparable to Senator Sanders’s. McCarthy’s bid was a direct response to the anti-Vietnam war “Dump Johnson” movement of the time, running against the presumptive nominee and current president Lyndon B. Johnson. The Democrats in all branches of government supported the war as much as their republican counterparts. Despite putting up a strong fight, he only won 23 percent of the delegates and vice president Hubert Humphrey won the nomination. Humphrey was not an anti-Vietnam war candidate but the movement had to vote for him in the general election, he was the “lesser of two evils”, there are many who fear this will happen to senator Sanders.

The independent left movements have been the backbone of the Sanders campaign. Sanders uses the same rhetoric of the Occupy Movement, utilizing the policies and goals along with the class struggle critique. Prominent members of the Black Lives Matter movement have met with the senator to discuss his positions on police reform and his policies certainly reflect that. Sanders appears to have energized a new labor movement in a way, many poor white voters in Oklahoma and other rural states that were disenfranchised by the Democrats. Sanders easily fits under the label of a “Social Democrat” but considers himself a “Democratic Socialist” and regardless of the label there are new polls showing that a growing percentage of self-described socialists. 43 percent of Iowa Democrats considered themselves socialists according to a Des Moines register poll. 43 percent of Americans under 30 had a favorable view of socialism according to a YouGov poll, less than a third of them had a favorable view of capitalism. These movements have built the base support of Sanders’s campaign.

Clinton’s support has not been as enthusiastic and her policies and elected endorsers represent that.

The elected moderate Democrats supporting Clinton are not representative of the movements Sanders is. When Sanders plans to fight against mass incarceration, he is fighting against the mass incarceration policies of the Democrats like Clinton and the money moderates have received from the private prison industry. When Sanders plans for a single-payer healthcare system, he is planning against the goals of Clinton and other democrats supporting only Obamacare, something entirely different from Sanders plan. Sanders support with and from the Black Lives Matter movement is something not many Democrats have, calling for the resignation of mayor of Chicago Rahm Emanuel is something unique to Sanders and few elected Democrats. Fighting corporations and corporate welfare is a whole different ballgame. Obama’s cabinet retains former CEOs and Clinton was once a prominent member of the Walmart board. Sanders wants to repeal Citizens United, a decision with wide bipartisan support. Elected Democrats do not come close to representing the independent movements.

Independent politics are what the movements have to turn to when the Democratic party is ignorant to the movements of change or even a complacent force in what independents want to change, but there isn’t much to turn to. Senator Sanders represents the success an independent politician could have. Sanders himself was an independent for a majority of his political career. Starting as a four-term independent Mayor of Burlington, Vermont, to serving as a representative of Vermont’s at-large congressional district for 16 years and his current position as Vermont Senator since 2007. His success is unique, but there are some smaller examples of outspoken socialist independents doing well.

“They make it very hard to have like a third party or an independent who can run and really hold a lot of power at the federal level so independents can through making their voices reverberate through the two-party system,” said Mike Kelly,president of world affairs club and co-captain of the debate club. “I don’t think that on a wide scale an independent party could hold a lot of power in American politics.”

Kshama Sawant’s role in her local government also shows what one can accomplish in local politics even as an independent in the two-party system. Sawant ran in the “Socialist Alternative” party for the Washington House of Representatives and sued the Washington secretary of state for her right to be listed under her party and won, she received 29% of the vote and placed second. She then entered the race for the Seattle City Council and won, becoming the first socialist elected to a political office in Seattle since a school board member in 1916. Other third party candidates have had little success in recent years as bipartisan rivalries have heightened, but there are still many vying for political offices.

To truly work towards change in this movement, there needs to be legitimate activism not just internet slacktivism.

“To be more involved you can volunteer for campaigns, there are many independent interest groups and advocacy groups you can join, there are protests,” Mike Kelly added, “it depends on the level people want to become involved in. There are actually a lot of things to get involved in, we have a relatively decentralized government, there are many access points to get involved. Really I would recommend people choose their passion then find an interest group that advocates for that position.