As it looks ever more certain that Hillary Clinton will win the Democratic presidential primary, supporters of Bernie Sanders should remember this: His candidacy was never about him.
Ms. Clinton has run as a candidate, as has Donald Trump. But Bernie? He has run promising a revolution.
And so if, come the Democratic Convention in Philadelphia, Hillary Clinton is the nominee, Bernie advocates must do two things. The first of these is that they must toe the party line and ensure that a Trump presidency does not occur, given that such an event would be a deathblow to any hopes of revolution.
The second is that they must not give up on their beliefs and involvement. Oftentimes without the presence of a polarizing national candidate, the most adamant activists retreat into complacency and disillusionment. These activists must instead latch onto the issues that have been integral to the Sanders campaign and move to make tangible changes in those areas if the Bernie revolution is to occur.
Take for example the idea of campaign finance reform. To challenge Citizens United, the most potent and probable route is to work from the ground up; the national opinion on the issue must be changed state by state and city by city. This will create new limits and will change the public perception of the issue. Then, a legal challenge must be mounted, one that will cause the issue to return to the Supreme Court, and eventually, if executed correctly, lead to the overturning of the current precedent.
But what of the plan to break up the banks, or the plans to bring about affordable and/or free college, both of which would require a concentrated federal effort? To achieve these goals, Bernie supporters must turn out and be active in the 2016 and 2018 congressional elections if they have any hopes of making these plans a reality. They must ensure that congressional representatives who support these positions are elected to the House and Senate, and they must hold these elected officials to those pledges.
This will require high voter engagement and turnout, especially in the 2018 midterms, even without the presence of a polarizing presidential candidate to stir up enthusiasm. They must avoid the lackluster showing for the Democrats in 2010 and 2014, which doomed the Obama presidency to six years of split government.
These are not easy tasks. In fact, if history is any indicator, the chance of them occurring is paltry at best. Voter turnout in midterm elections is generally low, especially among younger voters.
But has this election not shown that history is no indication of the future? A decade ago the concept of a nominee for a major party who identified as a socialist would have been absurd, and yet here we are.
And has recent history not shown the power of grassroots movements to change even the most entrenched political ideas? In 2008, then-candidates Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton ran on the platform that marriage was between a man and a woman. By 2015, Obergefell v. Hodges had ruled gay marriage a constitutional right, and Ms. Clinton had included the defense of LGBTQA rights as a major tenet of her presidential campaign.
The changes and movements I am suggesting are not without precedent, nor are they particularly impossible. They would simply require a concerted effort.
Bernie supporters are now faced with two options. In one, they continue their revolution, with or without Mr. Sanders, and over time they may succeed in changing the very narrative of American politics. In the other, the resign themselves to whatever comes their way. The choice is theirs.
Stefan Specian is a sophomore studying political science and journalism at McDaniel College. His email is sspecian95@gmail.com.