Until this election cycle, populism, the strategy to appeal to the general population, was a term mostly directed to the dusty bookshelves of American history or parties only present in European politics, like Podemos.
As of this election, though, that changed dramatically.
This presidential election cycle has been historic in both the number of outsiders and these outsiders’ prominence in the race.
Not since the period of William Jennings Bryan have we witnessed this kind of prominence from outsider candidates in an election.
While this is undoubtedly both interesting and effective in getting people involved in the political process, populism should not be considered an entirely good-willed cause.
Political understanding and literacy is not something that can be bragged about in most parts of the world, and the U.S. should not be an exception.
This is in no way a condemnation to people who don’t go to bed with a copy of the Constitution under their pillow; it is just how the world is.
People typically take cues of how to vote from trusted sources in their lives and perceptions they have of the world around them.
But energizing the voter base to go out and vote brings issues as well.
When a candidate bases policy on the general population, misperceptions and prejudices can begin to show during the campaign.
While these unsavory parts of society are always present, a candidate could stoke the flames of prejudice in order to help with his or her election bid.
But populists have a lot of problems here in the U.S. because of the two-party system endemic to our government.
Donald Trump, Bernie Sanders and Ted Cruz all rely on a party structure, regardless of where their loyalties may very well lie.
And the thing is, political parties build their elections in a way that makes an uphill battle for populists.
A perfect example of this is the superdelegates in the Democratic side, who vote on their preferred candidate at the July convention.
Even if a populist candidate wins a party’s primary and the general election, the issue of getting anything done still remains.
Candidates for Congress usually hold — or at least claim to hold — similar policies to those of the president in order to ride the proverbial coattails and get win elections, sometimes even in districts normally loyal to the other party.
This allows for an environment where the president-elect can work well with Congress, because most of them are on the same party.
This works well for establishment candidates, but for candidates like Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., who is unique in his political thought, it will be difficult for the Democrats to find candidates for Congress similar to him.
Few politicians, with the exception of Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Ma., share Sanders’ views.
This means Sanders would have to put in a lot of work to get the Democratic Party to go along with certain policies he wishes to pass.
The same could be said for Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Tx., who is easily one of the most disliked people in Congress across party lines.
Although I don’t see populist candidates making it all the way to the White House, it is definitely a trend that should be noted.
There is a clear dissatisfaction not just with a single political party, but also with the entire system.
The political parties need to become cognizant of this and work to combat this feeling.
Kevin Foster is a UF political science senior. His column appears on Thursdays.
